Brnovich flies under radar as he caves on illegal enforcement

April 6, 2015

It’s all about $aving taxpayer dollar$, doncha know?

Unless you’re an eagle-eyed reader, you might have missed the latest news from Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich. It was tucked away and hugging the bottom of Page 3 in a travelogue sounding section called “Around Arizona.”.

The Periódico de la República de Arizona (Arizona Republic) couldn’t be more gleeful to report that Brnovich filed a motion on Friday asking a U.S. District Court to dismiss the Ninth U. S. Circuit appeal of a policy charging illegal aliens as co-conspirators with their well-paid coyote transporters as they smuggle themselves into Arizona.  By pulling the appeal, Brnovich will let stand an injunction against enforcing the statute.

In a statement to the newspaper, Brnovich says he is “committed to defending Arizona from federal overreach and enforcing our immigration laws.” Then comes the “but,” which in legalese morphs into “however.”

“However, I also have an obligation to be responsible with taxpayer dollars and defend the state where we are most likely to prevail. That is why I filed for the dismissal of the state’s legal challenge to the human-smuggling portion of SB 1070 today.”

Karen Tumlin, a lawyer with the far-leftist, pro-illegal invasion National Immigration Law Center in California, cheered, “The chapter of the smuggling law is now officially over.” But she noted that litigation continues on others, including the “Show me your papers” statute that requires law-enforcement officials to inquire about the citizenship of people they stop and statutes regarding day laborers and impounding the vehicles of people harboring illegal immigrants. “This is a sign that the state may move away from this litigation,” Tumlin hopefully added.

In an astonishing double standard, The Republic evidenced no reluctance to use scare tactics in editorials and news reports including declaring citizens would be unable to board an airplane without an intrusive national ID card as it promoted legislation on a “Show me your papers” law for American citizens.


Fed. Judge stalls Obama’s amnesty executive order

February 18, 2015

Obama unable to suspend deportations

U.S. District Court Judge Andrew S. Hanen’s opinion and order cuts to the chase from page one of the 123-page document as he delivers a blow to Barack Obama‘s executive order on illegals, defining the issue in these terms:

This is a case in which twenty-six states or their representatives are seeking injunctive relief against the United States and several officials of the Department of Homeland Security to prevent them from implementing a program titled “Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents.” This program is designed to provide legal presence to over four million individuals who are currently in the country illegally, and would enable these individuals to obtain a variety of both state and federal benefits. It continues here.

Judge Hanen noted that the Department of Homeland Security “legislated a substantial rule without complying with the procedural requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act” because the executive amnesty provisions did not undergo “notice-and-comment rule making procedure.” He concluded that the Department of Homeland Security is “not rewriting laws,” but actually “creating them from scratch.” He also determined that Obama’s executive amnesty is a “complete abdication” of immigration enforcement.

Hanen said that if the program were allowed to proceed at this point, “The genie would be impossible to put back into the bottle.”  This video montage of Obama mocking the very executive orders he has been working to implement leaves no doubt he knew he was acting outside the framework of the law.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott is no stranger to suing the Obama administration, having filed more than 30 lawsuits while serving as Texas‘ Attorney General. In this case, he filed the lawsuit challenging Barack Obama‘s executive order and was  joined by numerous other states. The collective Plaintiffs include the States of Texas, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, West Virginia, Wisconsin., Michigan, Mississippi, Maine, North Carolina, Tennessee and Nevada.

The Obama administration is expected to appeal the ruling to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans.


Illegal ID thieves become victims in topsy-turvy world

January 27, 2015

The laws that Arizona citizens look to for protection from the life-altering crime of identity theft are not worthy of being enforced if the perpetrator happens to be an illegal alien, in the world according to U.S. District Court Judge David Campbell.

Prosecutors are now dismissing identity-theft cases in light of Campbell’s preliminary injunction ordering law enforcement and prosecutors to stop pursuing felony convictions in cases where stolen identity is used to obtain employment until he issues a final ruling on the case —- according to a report in the pro-open borders Periódico de la República de Arizona (Arizona Republic).

In short, this means that the court’s loathing of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio is greater than its concern for the actual victims of crime perpetrated by those who have invaded our country.

Ironically, Paul Charlton, the lawyer representing one of the highest-profile business owner defendants arrested by the sheriff’s office, is the former United States Attorney for the District of Arizona —- appointed by President George W. Bush.

Carlos Garcia, director of the radical Puente Arizona, one of the plaintiffs in the case, said he hopes the injunction is the beginning of the end for the ID-theft laws.

Sure. Why not?

Arizona courts have incrementally gutted the ability of law enforcement to protect citizens as further protections have been gifted to those invading our state and nation.

ID theft is not a victimless crime. “In some of the worst cases of identity theft, people who have had their name stolen, are refused loans, have lost their jobs, have had their wages garnished or been arrested for crimes they haven’t committed,” said AARP’s previous Arizona State Director David Mitchell.  “And cleaning up the mess can take years and money.”

Illegal alien identity thieves are also stealing your child’s future. Their Social Security numbers are especially valuable targets, since children aren’t employed, making discovery of the fraud unlikely until years after it has occurred and hundreds of thousands in debt have been accrued.

As far back as 2008 we wrote Illegal alien couple applied for home loan, bought cars, using stolen SSNs.

Has Judge David Campbell ever watched this video which highlights the $750,000 debt piled on a young Arizona girl by illegals? Does he care?


Judge Katherine Cooper’s cringe-worthy lack of judgment

January 22, 2015

Lady_Justice_Sneaks_a_Peek

Convicted sex offender & fugitive live-in boyfriend arrested at judge’s home

In a startling report of a judge —- entrusted with life or death decision-making in the lives of Maricopa County residents —- KPHO-TV 5 exposes the personal reality disconnect of Superior Court Judge Katherine “Kay” Cooper.

Living in the digital age and surrounded by nearly daily technological advances, it would be a reasonable assumption that a trial court judge would be astute enough to at least do a free public records search on the honey she’s moving into her home. Exercising that bit of savvy is known as being judicious —– at trait judges should have in abundance. Judge Cooper has been on the bench since being appointed by Gov. Jan Brewer in 2011.

In the case of romance-blinded Katherine Cooper, her live-in boyfriend of two years is a convicted sex offender under indictment for extortion in New York.

In this in-depth coverage, complete with photos of the couple, reporter Donna Rossi notes the judge’s boyfriend, Michael Kent Krause, 42, was indicted recently in New York on a felony charge of grand larceny due to extortion.

Detectives tracked Krause down at the central Phoenix home owned by Cooper after they could not locate him at a small, ramshackle trailer at a Mesa RV park where he rents a space. The Mesa location is the address the state has on record for Krause as part of his sex offender registration requirement.

Krause has quite a rap sheet. He’s a registered sex offender, a convicted felon out of California and was recently arrested at the judge’s home on a warrant for being a fugitive from justice.

It has also been reported that California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation records show that Krause has spent time in prison for burglary, assault with a deadly weapon and assault with intent to commit a sex offense.

Though she claimed to be “shocked” when news of the allegations against Michael Krause became public, and stated that he no longer resides with her, it appears she has hired a former law school classmate to defend him.

Judge Katherine Cooper (her first name was misspelled as Catherine in this voter guide) was just retained by Maricopa County voters in November.


AZ Federal judge protects illegals using stolen ID

January 7, 2015

Judicial overreaches reach new low

In a news article in which the headline is nearly as large as the report itself, the Periódico de la República de Arizona (Arizona Republic) enthusiastically treats readers to the latest in outrageous judicial actions. The report states, U.S. District Court Judge David Campbell “issued a preliminary injunction blocking Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery from enforcing two state laws that make it a felony for undocumented immigrants to use stolen identities to obtain work.”

Gnaw on that bit of preposterousness.  According to a federal judge illegal aliens have as much right to your identity as you do —- and neither law enforcement nor prosecutors are able to take legal action against the thieves. Children are viewed as especially attractive targets since their stolen identities usually go undetected for years.

Previously, when found, arrested and turned over to federal immigration officials, the identity thieves were deported. But, alas, those pesky felony convictions hindered their chances of returning to the U.S. legally. Now using legal contrivances reminiscent of George Orwell’s “1984” Newspeak, a federal judge rules that disallowing criminals free access to our county and the personal identity of American citizens is repressive.

Under court imposed pressure, Arpaio has announced plans to disband his work-site enforcement unit within the next two months, following completion of an ongoing investigation.

Campbell said the state laws that criminalize the act of identify theft for the purpose of obtaining employment are likely unconstitutional because they are preempted by federal law.

Jack MacIntyre, a lawyer and deputy chief with the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, correctly noted the ruling is “a little bit of an exercise in futility if you eliminate and declare a state law unconstitutional because of federal preemption with a wink and a nod to the reality that the federal government shows no interest in enforcing that area of immigration law.”

The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office is reviewing an appeal of the preliminary injunction.  Bill Montgomery said the ruling “underscores yet again the consequences of federal inaction and the Obama administration’s indifference to the effects of unlawful immigration practices. While pretending to address the concerns of people admittedly violating the law, the victims of identity theft are deprived of the state of Arizona’s protection.”

As expected, left-wing organizations including the ACLU and Hispanic advocacy groups, praised the contemptible ruling.


AZ Supreme Court allows OBrewerCare challenge to proceed

January 1, 2015

Lobbing a parting shot in Gov. Jan Brewer’s direction as she leaves office, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that state lawmakers have legal standing to challenge the hospital bed tax that is being used to fund a Medicaid eligibility expansion. Read the Supreme Court’s 14-page Opinion here. All of the three dozen legislators are named on page one.

At stake in the lawsuit is a critical voter-enacted state constitutional protection that requires two-thirds of the legislature to approve tax or fee increases. Arizona’s Medicaid expansion was funded by a new provider tax on hospitals, and it was not approved by the required super-majority of the legislature.

Brewer has argued that the assessment is not subject to the super-majority requirement because it is an “administrative fee” that will be set by the director of Arizona’s Health Care Cost Containment System, not lawmakers per se. Three-dozen lawmakers —- all named in the opening page of the suit —- are represented by the Goldwater Institute, which argues that the super-majority voting requirement should, in fact, apply because the legislature must authorize all new taxes or fees before they can be adjusted by an agency administrator.

The Goldwater Institute, representing the petitioners, has more here.

This is the second legal challenge Brewer’s Medicaid scheme has faced. A Maricopa County Superior Court judge dismissed the lawmakers’ first attempt. Later an appeals court ruled that the lawsuit could go forward and the Arizona  Supreme Court agreed. The case will now proceed to trial.

Seeing Red AZ has covered this issue extensively: 

Aug. 22, 2013:  Are you with OBrewerCare or an extreme fringe group?

July 20, 2013:  Obama’s “Affordable Care Act” exposed as costly charade

June 11, 2013: Petulant Brewer holds legislators hostage

June 1, 2013:  National Review explains “Brewer’s Tantrum”

May 17, 2013:  AZ Senate RINOs cave on OBrewerCare expansion

Apr: 12, 2013: GOP lawmakers tank supporting OBrewerCare

Apr. 9, 2013:   New poll: Brewer’s AZ Medicaid expansion on shaky ground

Jan. 21, 2013: Nat’l Review slams Brewer’s ObamaCare $urrender


Newly licensed illegals to be driving AZ streets

December 19, 2014

Under the heading “IMMIGRATION” —- slyly omitting the key word, “illegal” —- the pro-amnesty/open borders local newspaper illustrates how it has earned its name: The Periódico de la República de Arizona. The report by Daniel Gonzalez is titled in bold-faced caps, ”ROAD CLEARS FOR ‘DREAMER’ DRIVERS.

The legislative acronym D.R.E.A.M.E.R., representing Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors has been consigned to the political trash heap by the leftist, agenda-driven newspaper in favor of the softer version, implying one who is simply enjoying a deep sleep. In fact, it represents a nightmare.

The first two sentences of Gonzalez’ report deceptively uses the word “immigrant” twice when referring to illegal aliens, who have done nothing to facilitate applying for legal citizenship as true immigrants do.

“Young immigrants known as dreamers will be able to begin applying for driver’s licenses on Monday, according to a court ruling handed down Thursday by U.S. District Court Judge David G. Campbell. Campbell issued a preliminary injunction ordering Arizona to stop denying driver’s licenses to young immigrants known as dreamers.”

It will be impossible to ascertain whether these illegals arrived as infants brought by their law-breaking parents or yesterday, alone. Many already have black market licenses, as do their parents. The sale of counterfeit and stolen documents such as licenses, birth certificates and social security cards constitute a thriving business in Hispanic communities. The questions to ask are, will insurance be required prior to processing the licenses and how will such a provision be enforced?

State-issued driver’s licenses open doors of opportunity in the United States. Not only does a  license grant the privilege to operate a vehicle, it also is widely accepted as an identification card that enables the bearer to access countless services and taxpayer-funded benefits. Driver’s licenses are used to rent apartments and cars, open bank accounts, cash checks, enter secure buildings, buy guns, and board commercial aircraft.

In a statement released Thursday, Gov. Jan Brewer correctly said, “The right to determine who is issued a driver license is reserved for the states –– not the federal government or an unelected judiciary. It is outrageous that Arizona is being forced to ignore longstanding state law and comply with a flawed federal court mandate that requires the state, at least temporarily, to issue driver licenses to individuals whose presence is in violation of federal law, as established by the United States Congress.”

“At stake in this case are the fundamental issues of constitutional law and state sovereignty. Arizona has the constitutional right and authority to enforce state statute. This right must be protected. It must be defended.”

Read Brewer’s complete statement here.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 358 other followers