Texas Fed Ct orders U.S. to explain possible violation of immigration injunction

Legal Insurrection

Obama executive immigration action remains on hold.

Obama Immigration Executive Action Speech End

The Texas federal court that issued a temporary injunction halting Obama’s immigration executive action has just ordered the U.S. government to respond to allegations by the plaintiff States that the U.S. misrepresented to the Court the status of granting deportation waivers, and may thereby be in violation of the court’s temporary injunction.

As explained by John Hinderaker at Power Line, the issue revolves around representations the government made to the Judge, representations called into question by an unexpected “advisory” filed by the U.S. government:

Since Judge Hanen’s order was issued, it has come to light that by the date of the order, the Obama administration had already granted expanded DACA benefits (three years rather than two years) to approximately 100,000 illegal aliens. The Department of Justice disclosed this fact to Judge Hanen in a surprise filing:

In a “Defendants’ Advisory” filed with Hanen’s court late Tuesday, the Justice Department notified the judge that it has already implemented significant parts of the Expanded DACA program, and indeed that it has already granted expanded DACA protections and work permits to “approximately 100,000″ people.

The government’s lawyers essentially admitted that they were disclosing this fact because it was contrary to what they had previously told the court. That has led to a motion by the State of Texas to be allowed to conduct discovery to find out what happened. Here is Texas’s brief in support of that motion.

The Court just ruled this afternoon (Order at bottom of post) that it would not consider the U.S. motion to stay the temporary injunction until a hearing on the possible violations and misrepresentations on March 19.

Unless vacated on an emergency basis by the 5th Circuit, that means the immigration executive action remains on hold for at least another 10 days.

It also means that the extensions to 100,000 illegal aliens, while prior to the injunction, may be in violation of the injunction because the deferral continues.  That is why the U.S. filed the advisory in the first place, to get ahead of the issue and appear to volunteer the information before it was discovered.

More details and analysis to follow.

Texas v. U.S. - Immigration Case - Order March 5 2015 re U.S. Advisory

The U.S. Government Can Brand You a Terrorist Based on a Facebook Post

facebook_2

The Daily Sheeple

The US government’s web of surveillance is vast and interconnected. Now we know just how opaque, inefficient and discriminatory it can be.

As we were reminded again just this week, you can be pulled into the National Security Agency’s database quietly and quickly, and the consequences can be long and enduring. Through ICREACH, a Google-style search engine created for the intelligence community, the NSA provides data on private communications to 23 government agencies. More than 1,000 analysts had access to that information.

This kind of data sharing, however, isn’t limited to the latest from Edward Snowden’s NSA files. It was confirmed earlier this month that the FBI shares its master watchlist, the Terrorist Screening Database, with at least 22 foreign governments, countless federal agencies, state and local law enforcement, plus private contractors.

The watchlist tracks “known” and “suspected” terrorists and includes both foreigners and Americans. It’s also based on loose standards and secret evidence, which ensnares innocent people. Indeed, the standards are so low that the US government’s guidelines specifically allow for a single, uncorroborated source of information – including a Facebook or Twitter post – to serve as the basis for placing you on its master watchlist.

Of the 680,000 individuals on that FBI master list, roughly 40% have “no recognized terrorist group affiliation”, according to the Intercept. These individuals don’t even have a connection – as the government loosely defines it – to a designated terrorist group, but they are still branded as suspected terrorists.

The absurdities don’t end there. Take Dearborn, Michigan, a city with a population under 100,000 that is known for its large Arab American community – and has more watchlisted residents than any other city in America except New York.

These eye-popping numbers are largely the result of the US government’s use of a loose standard – so-called “reasonable suspicion” – in determining who, exactly, can be watchlisted.

 

– See more at: http://www.thedailysheeple.com/the-u-s-government-can-brand-you-a-terrorist-based-on-a-facebook-post_092014#sthash.GXdCnXJ4.dpuf