*Updates* BREAKING: The Hanen Injunction Upheld in 5th Circuit Court of Appeals – *Update* Full Outline…

Texas Judge Hanen previously blocked Obama’s unconstitutional “Executive Action on immigration” which expanded deferred deportation and granted employment status for illegal aliens.  The DOJ appealed the injunction to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. Today Hanen’s injunction was upheld by the appellate court, the DOJ lost.

update-1Update 2: Here’s the 68 page ruling:

update-1UPDATE 1: Fox’s Shannon Bream has a great video explanation HERE

(Via FOX) Two out of the three judges voted Tuesday to deny the government’s request, as the underlying case is argued.  The majority opinion reasoned that lifting the temporary hold — known in judicial parlance as a “stay” — could cause serious problems for states should they ultimately win their challenge. It said the states have shown that “issuance of the stay will substantially injure” them.

It continued: “A stay would enable DAPA beneficiaries to apply for driver’s licenses and other benefits, and it would be difficult for the states to retract those benefits or recoup their costs even if they won on the merits. That is particularly true in light of the district court’s findings regarding the large number of potential beneficiaries, including at least 500,000 in Texas alone.”  (link)

The decision today means:  A.) The Obama Executive Action remains “halted”, and B.) The DOJ will have to argue the underlying case, on it’s merits (which caused the injunction).

The DOJ can appeal today’s upholding decision (the 5th CCA retaining the Hanen injunction) two ways:  #1 to the Supreme Court Justice who is assigned to the 5th CCA.  However, that Supreme Court Judge is Anthony Scalia so that avenue would be unfavorable and therefore unlikely. Or, #2) by asking the full panel of the 5th Circuit to hear their appeal again. This takes a long time, and therefore, again, unlikely.

In essence the most probable ‘Next Step’ is the DOJ having to accept the injunction and argue the underlying court case while the executive action remains blocked.

facepalm-Obama*NOTE* Don’t forget, the DOJ still has to face the consequences for lying to Judge Hanen about the administration violating the injunction.  Hanen was waiting until after the 5th CCA decision to deliver his punishment toward the DOJ lawyers for two significant lies told to his court.       

If you are unfamiliar with the Hanen injunction I’m attaching below the thread from April which outlined a really brilliant judicial chess move by Judge Hanen who knew the injunction was going to be appealed to the 5th CCA.

This is the BACKSTORY of Todays Ruling

APRIL 2015 – Two judicial rulings yesterday, one in Obama’s favor and one against. However, the ruling released late last night shows a crafty piece of judicial chess.

The first ruling yesterday was a 5th Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Mississippi VS DHS (more here). The 5th circuit ruled against the State of Mississippi, and in favor of the Obama DOJ, by essentially ruling the State failed to prove a burden of harm.

The second aspect inherent within the same 5th CCA ruling disregarded concerns of ICE/DHS retaliation -against border patrol enforcement- by asserting DHS rules forbid the retaliation; ergo the concerns were unfounded.

In the second issue, the ICE agents’ argument that they would receive retribution if they detained an illegal immigrant eligible for DACA, the court sided with ICE and DHS referencing handbooks and rules which forbid the administration from retribution. (link)

justice_scalesHowever, in the second case, the ruling late last night, Texas vs DHS, under the authority of Judge Andrew Hanen, the expanded Obama Executive Action was blocked from implementation in February.

Judge Hanen issued an emergency injunction stopping the expanded deferment authorization as outlined in President Obama’s November 2014 executive action.

Since the initial ruling the DOJ was now arguing for a lifting of that injunction, and Judge Hanen was having none of it.

A significant statement from Judge Hanen toward the DOJ attorneys was his admonishment for their prior misrepresentations to the court regarding implementation taking place. The DOJ had previously stated in court that DHS was not implementing the new “expanded executive action” yet, and any injunction would stop any adverse action.

It was later discovered –by an admission to the court– that DHS had, in actuality, already begun to implement the November “executive action”. Judge Hanen was understandably angered by the misrepresentation.

texas judge ruling

The entire ruling last night is embedded here for your review.

However, I would like to draw your attention to the timing, and aspect of the Hanen ruling which overlaps with the earlier 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling.

Judge Hanen knows that his decision is going to be appealed to the same federal circuit court of appeals who ruled earlier in the day. Hanen is obviously fully anticipating his ruling being challenged in the 5th CCA, and it appears he keenly awaited their ruling in the Mississippi case to see how they responded to the more innocuous aspect of the Border Patrol Retaliation concern.

Hanen was not concerned about the issue of provable harm because in his court the harm was already outlined (expanded work authorization or a new category of eligible employment status). Hanen was more interested to see how the 5th CCA would rule on the concern about retaliation for border patrol agents who did not comply with the expanded executive action.

The DHS/ICE execution aspect, and the consequences for ICE Agent/Border Patrol non-compliance is a consideration in both cases. In the Mississippi case the 5th CCA disregarded the concern as unfounded and without merit.

[Page 14 …] The Agents claim a number of different injuries. First, they allege that they are being compelled to violate their oath to uphold the laws of the United States if they follow the Directive. Second, the burden of complying with DACA is causing injury to the Agents. Finally, the Agents argue that they are threatened with employment sanctions if they do not follow the Directive.

[…] As we stated above, Plaintiffs must allege an injury that is “concrete and particularized” and “actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical.” The threat of a future injury can suffice as a sufficient injury in fact, but only if it is “certainly impending.” “[W]e have repeatedly reiterated that . . . ‘[a]llegations of possible future injury’ [is] not sufficient.”

We begin with the observation that Plaintiffs have provided no evidence that any agent has been sanctioned or is threatened with employment sanctions for detaining an alien and refusing to grant deferred action under DACA. (link)

By Judge Hanen waiting to see how the 5th CCA ruled in the Mississippi case he was better positioned to formulate his order as to withstand a similar scrutiny (argument) by the appellate court. He did so brilliantly.

You’ll note in his ruling (pgs 4, 5, 6) Judge Hanen cited a Town Hall discussion Obama held with Univision. The timing of the Town Hall was between Hanen’s injunction order blocking implementation, and the affirmation of that injunctive order last night.

Why is that important? Judge Hanen is using President Obama’s own words about enforcement to deconstruct the 5th CCA decision in the Mississippi case.

Note excerpt from Hanen ruling:

In response to a question from an individual upset over a deportation action, the President said:

THE PRESIDENT: “I would have to know the details of what exactly happened. But what I can tell you is that until we pass a law through Congress, the executive actions that we’ve taken are not going to be permanent; they’re temporary. We are now implementing a new prioritization. There are going to be some jurisdictions, and there may be individual ICE officials or Border Patrol who aren’t paying attention to our new directives. But they’re going to be answerable to the head of the Department of Homeland Security, because he’s been very clear about what our priorities should be. And I’ve been very clear about what our priorities should be.”

MR. DIAZ-BALART [the moderator]: “But what are the consequences? Because how do you ensure that ICE agents or Border Patrol won’t be deporting people like this? I mean, what are the consequences?”

THE PRESIDENT: “José, look, the bottom line is, is that if somebody is working for ICE and there is a policy and they don’t follow the policy, there are going to be consequences to it. So I can’t speak to a specific problem. What I can talk about is what’s true in the government, generally.

In the U.S. military, when you get an order, you’re expected to follow it. It doesn’t mean that everybody follows the order. If they don’t, they’ve got a problem. And the same is going to be true with respect to the policies that we’re putting forward“.

Press Release, Remarks by the President in Immigration Town Hall – Miami, FL, The White House Office of the Press Secretary (Feb. 25, 2015), available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/02/25/remarks-president-immigration-town-hall-miami-fl (emphasis added).

[Judge Hanen continues…] The President’s message, specifically to those law enforcement officials employed within the Executive Branch, and more generally to the nation, is clear. First, immigration laws (INA), which those officials are charged with enforcing, are not to be enforced when those laws conflict with the 2014 DHS Directive. Second, the criteria set out in that Directive are mandatory. Third, if DHS officials (or other Executive Branch officials) fail to follow the specified criteria, there will be consequences for this failure.

Just as there would be consequences if they were in the military and disobeyed an order from the Commander in Chief. In summary, the Chief Executive has ordered that the laws requiring removal of illegal immigrants that conflict with the 2014 DHS Directive are not to be enforced, and that anyone who attempts to do so will be punished.


BOOM ! By using Obama’s own words Judge Hanen deconstructs the previous 5th CCA assertion of “no possibility for punitive harm” in the Mississippi ruling; and simultaneously puts an affirmative consideration into his own ruling – which proves the “possibility for punitive harm” in the Texas case before him which he is deciding.

Brilliant Judicial Chess Move.

By waiting to see the outcome of the Mississippi case (5th Circuit Appeal) Judge Hanen has essentially removed one weapon which the DOJ attorneys could use against his own ruling when it enters the same appellate court.

This entry was posted in A New America, Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, Cultural Marxism, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Illegal Aliens, media bias, Notorious Liars, Obama Research/Discovery, Typical Prog Behavior. Bookmark the permalink.

77 Responses to *Updates* BREAKING: The Hanen Injunction Upheld in 5th Circuit Court of Appeals – *Update* Full Outline…

  1. 2x4x8 says:

    I expected another Federal Court case to go against Obama

    BS detector


  2. John Galt says:

    RINO haz a sad.

    Liked by 2 people

    • doodahdaze says:

      Up his. Vote for Bernie Sanders and tax his buddies in to the abyss. HAHAHA! That is the threat that will get their attention big time. The RINO is trying to sell poor constitutional conservatives down the river IMO. Anyone think I am wrong?

      Liked by 1 person

      • fred says:

        mcConnel is despicable and a poor excuse for a man with no honor nor integrity much less a bought and sold off politician lining his own pockets at our expense. He has crushed all euphoria and pride in the landslide victory we handed him. He has abused us in the worst ways and needs to be censored and removed by the rest of the GOP if they ever hope to regain their base.

        Liked by 1 person

    • VegasGuy says:

      Could just as easily be soiled Depends…..

      Liked by 1 person

  3. FlatFoot says:

    This Is Institutional Racism! This Is An Outrage!

    In 5… 4… 3… 2… 1…

    Liked by 6 people

  4. Dr. Bogus Pachysandra says:

    The Barachnid will find a “workaround!”


  5. doodahdaze says:

    WOW! What a slapdown and obliteration of Obama and his communist minions. Devastating. They use the so called American Presidents own words to destroy his un-american communist plot.

    Liked by 4 people

  6. 2x4x8 says:

    we got the Supreme Court decision coming soon on Health Insurance Exchange tax credit, which should definitely go against Obama also


  7. doodahdaze says:

    Lib heads exploding nationwide about judicial branch . They are in a panic. Obama is powerless and their last hope. Get popcorn as the pundits pontificate about how awful representative government is when they can’t rule by their dictator.

    Liked by 3 people

  8. doodahdaze says:

    The best part of this is that if Obama appeals….it goes to Justice Scalia. HAHAHAHAHAH!

    Liked by 2 people

    • peppie says:

      Yep yep.


    • joshua says:

      the dissenting judge of 5th circuit was an Obama appointee recommended by La gov Mary Landrieu…big surprise…the affirmative judges were appointed by Reagan and another by Bush. Opinions along party line maybe….


  9. joshua says:

    There’s something happening here
    What it is ain’t exactly clear
    There’s a man with a gun over there
    Telling me I got to beware

    I think it’s time we stop, children, what’s that sound
    Everybody look what’s going down

    There’s battle lines being drawn
    Nobody’s right if everybody’s wrong

    Liked by 1 person

  10. James F says:

    “I was a constitutional law professor, which means unlike the current president I actually respect the Constitution.”

    Obama’s former students should sue for a full refund. And of course he was a “senior lecturer” not an actual department Professor.

    Liked by 3 people

  11. DeWalt says:

    That was the 5th circuits ruling, but who will enforce it?


  12. rsmith1776 says:

    One has to admire this judge on all levels. I’ve seldom encountered contemporary legal language to show this clarity, accuracy, targeted energy. One can almost sense the judge’s justified annoyance with the DoJ and W.H. crooks but he manages to leave emotion aside and make inexpugnable, textbook legal arguments.

    Thank you Sundance.

    Liked by 6 people

    • sundance says:

      Agreed on Judge Hanen.

      Also, remember; I’m 99% positive the underlying issue of the entire case is NOT winnable for the Obama administration. At the heart of the legal issue is Obama’s redefinition of an entire new classification of immigrant “illegal, yet lawful”.

      President Obama simply went too far. As soon as Obama granted legal work eligibility to unlawful immigrants he blew it. That REALLY is the heart of the problem.

      He had no constitutional authority to re-write employment eligibility law. THAT IS HIS PROBLEM and a problem that even the liberal Justices on SCOTUS will be forced to admit, if it gets to them. (which I don’t think it will)

      The executive action was a “political decision”, hence the Obama administration changed the verbiage from “Executive Order” to “Executive Action”. Even Obama’s own Office of Legal Counsel knew the presidential authority could not reclassify or re-write employment law.

      Today is a victory. PERIOD. No “ifs”, “ands”, or “Buts”. Period.

      Today is a victory because the underlying case is a no-brainer for the courts. Once the DOJ is forced to argue the merits of the case, the “executive action”, they will lose. Period. Today forces them to address those merits quicker.


      Liked by 9 people

      • joshua says:

        kinda like a little bit pregnant.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Throughout President Obama’s term, he has not abided by the law when laws prevent him from moving his agenda forward. What will prevent him from defying Judge Hanen? This Administration has simply ignored the Constitution & dared us to do anything about it. Will they abide this judge’s rulings? I hope the judge comes down on the DOJ lawyers who lied to him with a ton of bricks. I hope he puts these lawyers in jail & moves to have them disbarred.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Exactly my sentiments.

          The Congress should be acting to STOP him. If that means that the Sergeant at Arms arrests him. Something has to be done before it is too late. It may already be too late.


  13. doodahdaze says:

    Judge Higginson and Obama’s are indisposed. Their minds are going going……..

    Liked by 1 person

  14. dalethorn says:

    It’s a terrible thing that we have to tie up our courts and spend so much taxpayer money fighting this stuff. In effect, we have a monkey on our back so to speak, put there by Obama Executive Action, and it’s on us to pay to get it off, if we can.


  15. doodahdaze says:

    Anybody got the text?


  16. joshua says:

    not what Obama was PLANNING as an outcome…

    he had THIS more in mind with his executive order acceptance and approval:


  17. sundance says:


  18. Josie says:

    I’m amused by the consequences Oby mentions. Govt employees cannot be fired, amirite? IRS, VA etc. So, if you can’t get fired, what do the border patrol have to fear? Do the right thing. Can’t be fired.


  19. tresco303 says:

    Sorry to be such a debbie downer but I don’t see how this is going to make any difference. We have been living in a post-constitutional country for years now and there isn’t going to be any consequences to anything O or his lawless administration does. Nobody is getting impeached. Nobody is going to jail. Nada. Zip. What if Obama just up and decides that there isn’t going to be an election in 2016? I don’t see anybody stepping up and telling dear leader “no”.


  20. Jett Black says:

    Nobody gets tried and executed for treason or sedition anymore, either. Too damn bad. There’s plenty folks who sho nuff got it coming. Rope. Tree. Demonrat or RINO. Some assembly required.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. cindya says:

    I work at a university in California and we have students from Mexico producing “Employment Authorization cards already. This has been going on for a few years that I am aware of because one of our students just had to renew her employment authorization card. It seems they are issued for 2 – 3 years and then have to be renewed.

    Liked by 1 person

    • joshua says:

      contrast that with the Ferguson and Baltimore inhabitants that don’t NEED employment authorization cards, as they do not WANT employment ….gets in the way of the bigger payroll they get from the govt benefits.


      • nimrodman says:

        Exactly. As I’m fond of saying:

        We’re paying one underclass to sit on their a$$es and blow blunts all day while importing a second underclass to do the work the first underclass refuses to do.

        Your tax dollars at work. Funding social dysfunction and societal breakdown in what was formerly a great nation.

        Liked by 1 person

        • joshua says:

          sort of redistribution of wealth, job creation, and a new leisure class creation all at the same time…just those that earned the wealth are not in the equation of the receiving end at all.


      • Judgy says:

        That’s an EXCELLENT point!

        Unfortunately, many change once they’ve been here for awhile, or their citizen offspring become so indoctrinated w/ La Raza crap that THEY don’t want to work either. My chief complaint about illegal immigration is we have enough problematic people here already, WITHOUT letting in people whose first very move was to utterly disregard our laws, and no way to rid ourselves of those people already here.

        Funny, doesn’t seem to happen so much w/ Asians…….


  22. bofh says:

    What’s the difference? Barky isn’t going to abide by it anyway, and the invaders are already getting working papers and everything else.

    Hey, maybe the GOPe “leadership” in the house and senate will do something about it… wait, what? Oh…


  23. lorac says:

    About time that someone with a brain rules against the idiot in the white house and sides with AMERICANS not bunch of illegal aliens!

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s