A Washington D.C. district judge recently ordered the Trump Administration to restart the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. He stated that the legal reason for the Department of Homeland Security ending the program wasn’t “sound.”
U.S. District Court Judge John Bates was nominated to the bench under President George W. Bush. Bush was soft on immigration issues, so it only makes sense that the judges he chose would be as well. Bates is allowing until August 23 to give the Justice Department an argument for rebuttal. However, his mind already appears to be made up.
It is becoming more common for a judge to take the stance of a community organizer, instead of an interpreter of the law. Perhaps it is time for judges to rule on the law, instead of being judicial activists.
Judges or Activists?
This is not the first time a judge has declared a fiat from the bench based on his or her own personal or political beliefs.
The highest profile example is the case Roe v. Wade. Texas criminalized abortions, which eventually took the case before the Supreme Court. The majority ruled that the right to privacy is a greater priority than the right to unchosen conception by the unborn child, despite that our founding document, the Declaration of Independence enshrines, “the right to life.” Roe v. Wade should have gone back to the states.
The president’s so-called “Muslim ban” faced its own judicial challenges. When Trump took office, he immediately went after countries where radical Islamic terrorism was prevalent. The left began with their typical outrage and chose a judge in the most liberal circuit to put a block on the order. This happened on three different occasions, even though the Constitution is very clear about presidential power as it pertains to immigration policies. The president’s immigration executive order was eventually heard in front of SCOTUS and confirmed to be lawful.
The Judiciary and DACA
Obama was pressed to make changes to the immigration laws personally so that illegal aliens received amnesty. Several times, he pushed back and admitted that he could not unilaterally make laws and that Congress would need to be involved in the process. That is, until Obama decided to make a law via executive order, which became known as DACA.
Now, leftists are moving back to the issue of DACA. If Democrats don’t watch it, they will be embarrassed again like they were when the government was shut down for a whole nine hours over DACA earlier in the year.
Democrats and Judge Bates know this will get overturned. DACA can’t stand on its own legally because it wasn’t ordered underneath a preexisting law, which is a requirement for an executive order to hold.
The entire DACA issue needs to go to SCOTUS so that it will be ruled unlawful, and the whole question put to rest.
Activist judges are fueling the fire of division in the country. Their actions give unwarranted credence to the hysterical leftists that can’t get over the fact that Hillary lost the election. Those who are on court benches have an enormous responsibility, and that is to interpret the law.
It doesn’t matter what Judge Bates’ political affiliation is. Left or right, judges should adhere to the Constitution and whether or not a law or executive order is legal. Period.
Judges should not be involved in social justice activism.Whatfinger.com