9th Circuit Judge: DHS Officers Humiliate Judges by Enforcing Immigration Laws

[IAMX 3,055]

 

Quote

 

Judges are humiliated and dehumanized whenever they must enforce the nation’s immigration laws, according to a senior judge on the far-left Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The judge’s cry of outrage came when he could not block the orderly repatriation of an illegal immigrant who has two drunk driving convictions, plus a U.S. wife and three children.

“We are unable to prevent [Andres] Magana Ortiz’s removal, yet it is contrary to the values of this nation and its legal system,” complained Judge Stephen Reinhardt, who wishes to extend citizens’ rights to illegal foreign migrants. He said: 

We are compelled to deny Mr. Magana Ortiz’s request for a stay of removal because we do not have the authority to grant it. We are not, however, compelled to find the government’s action in this case fair or just. …

The government’s decision to remove Magana Ortiz diminishes not only our country but our courts, which are supposedly dedicated to the pursuit of justice. Magana Ortiz and his family are in truth not the only victims. Among the others are judges who, forced to participate in such inhumane acts, suffer a loss of dignity and humanity as well. I concur as a judge, but as a citizen I do not.

The judge, who was appointed — not elected — in 1980 and is married to a former top leader in the ACLU, also lamented the authority of ordinary DHS agents to enforce the law despite protests from well-paid, high-status “civil rights” lawyers:

On January 25, 2017, the President [Donald Trump] signed a series of executive orders dismantling the system of priorities that had previously guided Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol in determining whom to deport. The orders also gave far greater authority to individual agents and officers, who are now removing non-citizens simply because they are here illegally, regardless of whether they have committed any offense. In light of the breadth of these orders and the lack of any apparent limit on agents’ discretion, the undocumented must now choose between going to work, school, hospitals, and even court, and the risk of being seized.

In contrast, the new Supreme Court Justice appointed by Trump, Neil Gorsuch, has a more humble vision of his job as a judicial referee, saying in a 2013 award ceremony that:

As my daughters remind me, donning a [judicial] robe doesn’t make me any smarter … It serves as a reminder of what’s expected of us—what [Irish philosopher Edmund] Burke called the “cold neutrality of an impartial judge.” It serves, too, as a reminder of the relatively modest station we’re meant to occupy in a democratic society. In other places, judges wear scarlet and ermine. Here, we’re told to buy our own plain black robes — and I can attest the standard choir outfit at the local uniform supply store is a good deal. Ours is a judiciary of honest black polyester.

 

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/05/dhs-officers-humiliate-judges-enforcing-immigration-laws-declares-judge/

 

Even though the judge lamented about having to follow the law, he whines about not being above it. 9th circuit in a nutshell.

Edited June 5, 2017 by IAMX

[Jojo92122 1,924]

Oh Breibart.  What a reliable source.  

[IAMX 3,055]

3 minutes ago, Jojo92122 said:

Oh Breibart.  What a reliable source.  

What part about the article wasn't true? 

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

8 minutes ago, IAMX said:

 

 

Even though the judge lamented about having to follow the law, he whines about not being above it. 9th circuit in a nutshell.

How is the interest of the United States advanced by removing  Magana Ortiz?  Not at all.  

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

Just now, IAMX said:

What part about the article wasn't true? 

The part that looks at the how  Mr Ortiz was a good man who contributed to American life for 28 years and now will be deported away from his family.

[IAMX 3,055]

1 minute ago, ccneat said:

How is the interest of the United States advanced by removing  Magana Ortiz?  Not at all.  

It's a nation of laws,  the interests are advanced by enforcing those laws, rather than overstepping their boundaries as judges arbitrarily changing them to fit political leanings. 

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

3 minutes ago, IAMX said:

It's a nation of laws,  the interests are advanced by enforcing those laws, rather than overstepping their boundaries as judges arbitrarily changing them to fit political leanings. 

[CaliCat 3,957]

https://www.quora.com/Does-the-Ninth-Circuit-Court-have-the-highest-overturned-by-the-Supreme-Court-at-80

 

 

Does the Ninth Circuit Court have the highest overturned by the Supreme Court at 80%?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3 Answers

Robin Hubbard, Long Form Reader; TV watcher; Quora TW & TQW at Early Retirement

Answered 16 Feb

 

9th Circuit Court of Appeals highest reverse rate?

No.

SCOTUS only reviews a fraction of cases from the Appeals Courts (.106% of 60,500 cases). The 7th Circuit has the highest followed by the 9th of the 13 courts. Of the cases reviewed and reversed range from 55% to 83% with a median of 68% of the few cases reviewed. Therefore, 99% of all cases stand. Does the Supreme Court Overturn 80 Percent of Ninth Circuit Court Decisions?

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

32 minutes ago, ccneat said:

This is giving me a freaking headache.....

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

 

1 minute ago, cyberfx1024 said:

This is giving me a freaking headache.....

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

39 minutes ago, ccneat said:

The part that looks at the how  Mr Ortiz was a good man who contributed to American life for 28 years and now will be deported away from his family.

A good man with 2 drunk driving convictions???? He's lucky he never killed anyone while drunk.

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

Just now, cyberfx1024 said:

A good man with 2 drunk driving convictions???? He's lucky he never killed anyone while drunk.

[IAMX 3,055]

10 minutes ago, cyberfx1024 said:

A good man with 2 drunk driving convictions???? He's lucky he never killed anyone while drunk.

Well I mean, the left idolize people like Che Guevara, so.. 2 DUI's and lucky to not kill anyone? Saintly.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

1 hour ago, CaliCat said:

https://www.quora.com/Does-the-Ninth-Circuit-Court-have-the-highest-overturned-by-the-Supreme-Court-at-80

 

 

Does the Ninth Circuit Court have the highest overturned by the Supreme Court at 80%?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3 Answers

Robin Hubbard, Long Form Reader; TV watcher; Quora TW & TQW at Early Retirement

Answered 16 Feb

 

9th Circuit Court of Appeals highest reverse rate?

No.

SCOTUS only reviews a fraction of cases from the Appeals Courts (.106% of 60,500 cases). The 7th Circuit has the highest followed by the 9th of the 13 courts. Of the cases reviewed and reversed range from 55% to 83% with a median of 68% of the few cases reviewed. Therefore, 99% of all cases stand. Does the Supreme Court Overturn 80 Percent of Ninth Circuit Court Decisions?

Of cases that make it for review . They absolutely are as a percentage more fake news 

[IAMX 3,055]

15 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Of cases that make it for review . They absolutely are as a percentage more fake news 

Exactly. Kinda hard to even consider cases in the equation that don't even come up for review in SCOTUS. 

 

They didn't take issue with the graph nor the data, the source for these graphs are not Sean Hannity, they are the American Bar Association.. they merely countered with a point regarding intent of reversal which I've never heard anyone ever argue, and it's completely non sequitur, which makes sense from a garbage site like Snopes. 

 

 

You can do the math yourself.. 140/175=0.8 (80%)

 

80% of cases SCOTUS reviews from the 9th are overturned. As simple as it gets.

 

The study source from the American Bar:

https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/intelprop/magazine/LandslideJan2010_Hofer.authcheckdam.pdf

 

One can easily understand why Snopes is a crock by analyzing the data themselves, and the source Hannity uses is in fact correct. I don't take any issue with the other claim about SCOTUS taking up cases for reversals because in my life I've never heard this argued once, so I don't even find reason to attempt to debate this.

Edited June 5, 2017 by IAMX