Court again blocks Obama’s plan to protect undocumented migrants – Reuters in Washington Monday 9 November 2015 22.55 EST


Injunction is upheld against president’s measures that could prevent millions, including people who arrived illegally as children, being thrown out of the US

Demonstrators outside the White House in 2014 calling for an end to the deportation of undocumented children.

Barack Obama’s executive action to shield millions of undocumented immigrants from deportation has suffered a legal setback with an appeal to the supreme court now the administration’s only option.

A 2-1 decision by the fifth US circuit court of appeals in New Orleans has upheld a previous injunction – dealing a blow to Obama’s plan, which is opposed by Republicans and challenged by 26 states.

The states, all led by Republican governors, said the federal government exceeded its authority in demanding whole categories of immigrants be protected.

The Obama administration has said it is within its rights to ask the Department of Homeland Security to use discretion before deporting non-violent migrants with US family ties.

The case has become the focal point of the Democratic president’s efforts to change US immigration policy.

Article continues:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/nov/10/court-again-blocks-obamas-plan-to-protect-some-undocumented-migrants

 

FIFA, Freddie Gray and the New Power of the Prosecutor – By Benjamin Wallace-Wells May 31, 2015 10:50 p.m.


Marilyn Mosby. Photo: Alex Brandon/AP/Corbis

Marilyn Mosby. Photo: Alex Brandon/AP/Corbis

One reason that prosecutors are often such theatrical, grandiose types (Preet Bharara, Rudy Giuliani, Chris Christie) may be that the role naturally fits a particular quixotic self-image, the state’s attorney against the world. In the press clippings the prosecutor is not just a distributor of retributive justice, the official sent to ensure a mugger goes to jail, but the means by which the state takes on broader conspiracies and corruptions: The mafia, Islamic terrorists, rings of insider traders embedded within banks, hedge funds and corporations. The vanity of the state’s attorney is often that he is not just delivering individual justice but taking down corrupt and criminal institutions — that he is practicing modernization politics by other means.

Since 9/11 many liberals have worried about the powers that prosecutors were acquiring to monitor email and phone traffic, to trace the flows of money. The past couple of weeks have served as a reminder of how much a powerful state, in the hands of a progressive prosecutor, can do. First, Marilyn Mosby in Baltimore announced manslaughter and murder charges against the police officers involved in the death of Freddie Gray. Then in the space of the last few days Loretta Lynch first announced that four banks had agreed to pay $2.5 billion in fines for rigging the foreign exchange markets, and then revealed indictments against fourteen of the planet’s most senior soccer officials, describing a pattern of corruption and bribery that has been endemic within FIFA for decades.

The image that cohered in these two African-American women was that of the prosecutor as social justice warrior, with smoke-filled rooms evaporating before her. In the same press conference Lynch denounced the old boys club that had corrupted the World Cup and made the case for renewing a key provision of the Patriot Act. One interesting question, should a Democrat win election in 2016, is whether liberals will be more comfortable with an expansive state if that state is also an activist, progressive one.

Lynch and Mosby made their activism easy to see. In these three cases the prosecutors were more or less explicit that they were not just interested in jailing a few criminals but in changing a corrupt culture — of the police in Baltimore, the banks, institutional soccer. If politics were working perfectly, we wouldn’t need their intervention; criminal indictments wouldn’t be required to fix these institutions. But because they are, there is a tension at the heart of all these cases. What the prosecutor can do is to indict criminals for criminal behavior. What we want the prosecutor to do is not just put a few villains on parade but to make Wall Street more responsible, the police less brutal, soccer television rights more transparently marketed. Sometimes one leads naturally to the other. Not always.

Article continues:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/05/fifa-freddie-gray-and-the-new-power-prosecutor.html1

Appeals court sides with Obama on immigration action – By JOSH GERSTEIN 4/7/15 2:24 PM EDT


Barack Obama is shown. | AP Photo
AP Photo

A federal appeals court’s ruling Tuesday upholding the dismissal of a lawsuit over President Barack Obama’s first major executive action to aid illegal immigrants could help the Obama administration fight a more significant suit that has resulted in Obama’s second wave of immigration orders being halted nationwide.

A three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that several immigration agents and the state of Mississippi lacked legal standing to sue over Obama’s 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program because evidence that the agents or the state would be harmed by the effort was too speculative.

“Neither Mississippi nor the Agents have alleged a sufficiently concrete and particularized injury that would give Plaintiffs standing to challenge DACA,” Judge W. Eugene Davis wrote in an opinion joined by Judges Carolyn King and Priscilla Owen.

In February, a federal judge based in Brownsville, Texas issued an injunction against Obama’s decision last year to expand the DACA program to give quasi-legal status and work permits to millions more illegal immigrants who arrived in the U.S. as minors. The order from U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Hanen also barred the Department of Homeland Security from moving forward with a plan to extend the same benefits to illegal immigrant parents of U.S. citizens or permanent residents.

Hanen acted at the request of 26 states, led by Texas, arguing that Obama lacked the legal authority to implement what they contend is a de facto amnesty and legalization of millions of immigrants. One of the key issues in that case is whether Texas and the other states showed they would be harmed by the new round of immigration actions.

Legal experts scouring the 5th Circuit ruling Tuesday focused in particular on its treatment of Mississippi’s challenge to the original DACA program, aimed at so-called Dreamers.

Article continues:

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/obama-immigration-action-lawsuit-dismissal-upheld-appeals-court-116738.html?ml=po