sanctuary city richmond case thrown out out out

[Русский агент]

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit brought by a sanctuary city in California challenging President Donald Trump’s executive order withholding grants from jurisdictions that do not cooperate with federal immigration authorities

The city of Richmond, Calif., filed suit challenging the constitutionality of the order.

U.S. District Judge William Orrick dismissed the case, finding Richmond did not have standing to challenge the law.

Orrick was appointed to the federal bench by President Barack Obama in 2013.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/22/j...seeking-relief-from-trumps-immigration-order/

 

[archives]

And?

 

[BentBow]

It is a federal issue... They should know by now, what they give, they can also take it away.

That is why you don't want government involved in the first place. They get you beholding to them, and then threaten to take the ball away, if you don't do what they say.
It is best not to go there so they have no leverage for you to give up more of your liberty.

 

[Truth Detector]

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit brought by a sanctuary city in California challenging President Donald Trump’s executive order withholding grants from jurisdictions that do not cooperate with federal immigration authorities

The city of Richmond, Calif., filed suit challenging the constitutionality of the order.

U.S. District Judge William Orrick dismissed the case, finding Richmond did not have standing to challenge the law.

Orrick was appointed to the federal bench by President Barack Obama in 2013.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/22/j...seeking-relief-from-trumps-immigration-order/

The only one's who would be surprised are the whiny brain dead leftists who infest this forum with their lunacy.

 

[Truth Detector]

And?

 

[Русский агент]

The only one's who would be surprised are the whiny brain dead leftists who infest this forum with their lunacy.

looks like 1 of em is triggered 4 sho

 

[domer76]

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit brought by a sanctuary city in California challenging President Donald Trump’s executive order withholding grants from jurisdictions that do not cooperate with federal immigration authorities

The city of Richmond, Calif., filed suit challenging the constitutionality of the order.

U.S. District Judge William Orrick dismissed the case, finding Richmond did not have standing to challenge the law.

Orrick was appointed to the federal bench by President Barack Obama in 2013.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/22/j...seeking-relief-from-trumps-immigration-order/

Merely an issue of standing. A moron of your limited intelligence would not know what that means.

 

[canceled.2021.3]

And?

Nice try Legion. That is a big win for President Trump.

Not a good two days for you Legion. First I show you proof of JPP liberals lionizing the fascist Antifa and now this.

And it was an Obama appointed judge to boot? I must admit I color myself surprised. It must be a weak case if a judge appointed by your boy Obama shoots it down.

Poor Legion. Maybe Christiefan will kiss it and make it better?

 

[canceled.2021.3]

Merely an issue of standing. A moron of your limited intelligence would not know what that means.

Well one has to have standing to even bring a case. If this city doesn't who would?

I am happy to wait

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Merely an issue of standing. A moron of your limited intelligence would not know what that means.

at this point, yes.....standing issue. but it brings up a very interesting issue. say that standing does become an issue and a federal court then decides that the feds can't withhold federal money from sanctuary cities.........would that same ruling then apply to states that no longer want seatbelt laws, or mandatory insurance laws, or speed limit laws?????

 

[domer76]

Well one has to have standing to even bring a case. If this city doesn't who would?

I am happy to wait

Read the article.

 

[domer76]

at this point, yes.....standing issue. but it brings up a very interesting issue. say that standing does become an issue and a federal court then decides that the feds can't withhold federal money from sanctuary cities.........would that same ruling then apply to states that no longer want seatbelt laws, or mandatory insurance laws, or speed limit laws?????

lol

As with the statue issue, more proof of your desperation.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

lol

As with the statue issue, more proof of your desperation.

actually it was a serious question. you brought up federal funding of things with the case, which is what this sanctuary city lawsuit was about. can you answer the question?

 

[domer76]

actually it was a serious question. you brought up federal funding of things with the case, which is what this sanctuary city lawsuit was about. can you answer the question?

Sorry, I tend to not answer stupid questions. Standing is the issue, not federal funding.

 

[chink]

And?

and suck it up liberals ,it is coming to a sanctuary city near you.

 

[Русский агент]

Merely an issue of standing. A moron of your limited intelligence would not know what that means.

it meanz their suit was dismissed

they cant be a party to a case that haznt impacted them

sux 2 be the richmond city atty and u

 

[canceled.2021.3]

And?

Why did you run from our conversation? You claimed that I was making it up that people were comparing Antifa to WWII Vets. I gave you examples and POOF you disappeared

What the hell are you talking about, "akin to WWII vets?" Funny

After just labeling them dimwits and imbecile your now claiming someone "lionizing them?" Your making up things again, keep telling you this ain't talk radio

And the only people who are "hanging them" around Democrats are you and the radio demogogues you listen to, rest of America recognizes them for what they are, dimwits and imbeciles

Legion you used to be much better at this. Your sex affair with Christie has really slowed you down. This is just a sampling.

I applaud anyone who stands up to evil. All the counterprotesters who showed at Charlottesville deserve recognition for having the courage of their convictions and doing the right thing. I honesty don't know much about Antifa as an organization but if Charlottesville is any indicator they are people of principle and action. It's hilarious that Antifa, an abbreviation for Anti Fascist, are now the far rights boogeyman displacing Muslims. Tells you about everything you need to know about the values and morals of the far right that antifascist make them shit themselves in fear which, if you think about it, is a pretty good thing.

Are you so blinded by ideology and political partisanship that you can't differentiate between right and wrong? The counter protesters did the right thing. They stood up and attacked evil. It's a simple as that. There is no moral equivalency.

Good God Grind is going into full retard mode.

Who gives a flying fuck Grind? It's an utterly retarded fucking question. No fucking shit both sides are responsible for the violence. What kind of stupid thing is that to say?

Let me explain it to you sonny boy since your ability to think critically has gone south (irony intended).

It isn't a fucking issue who started the violence. What sort of third grade shit is that? Is your justification "He started it!"? Give me a fucking break!

This is an issue about those who lack the moral terpitude to keep from drawing a false moral equivalency. It boils down to this...and is pathetically sad this has to be explained to you...a group of repugnant and evil white supremacist and Nazis invaded a town intent on committing violence and group of concerned citizens stood up and did the right thing by attacking evil where it was. Just like my Grandfathers generation did when they attacked the German Nazis in WWII.

I can tell you this, if those vile evil klucksters and Nazis show up in my city to start some shit they better be prepared to get their asses kicked cause I and many others will stand up and do the right thing as we will not tolerate the evil mother fuckers. You may decide to tolerate or even support evil in your midst but if so make no mistake about it...somewhere you went wrong pal.

So yea...half the people support Trumps conclusion. What a sad day in America and what sad mother fuckers those supporters are.

Tell me how Charlottesville is different from World War Two, on a fundamental visceral level.
I saw brave patriotic Americans fighting off violent, racist Nazi scumbags...

What side was Darthy rooting for?...What side will Darthy be cheering on in Boston tomorrow?
I think it's kind of obvious.

I commend their bravery as patriotic Americans, in the face of Nazi white supremacist scumbags...
They don't need defending.
Got it, racist?

 

[Русский агент]

oops

sux 2 b buck

 

[archives]

You conservatives are delusional, any action the President's team takes will be tied up in the Courts for years, and just like his other photo op decisions will be removed by the stroke of a pen in three years

 

[Rune]

actually it was a serious question. you brought up federal funding of things with the case, which is what this sanctuary city lawsuit was about. can you answer the question?

Already answered too many times but pay attention;
Under the Anti- Commandeering Clause of the 10th, the cities or states cannot be compelled...via withholding of funds...to do the work of Federal angencies.
Since immigration in entirely a Federal purview, the clear and obvious answer is no.