Categories
Immigration Legal, Laws, and Regs

US vs Abbott and dissenting judge is awful

More on my favorite case

The dissenting judge is a Trump-appointed judge long known for his extremist views. And my goodness, he wrote an awful dissent.

Gov. Abbott must remove ‘floating wall’ from the Rio Grande, 5th Circuit rules

Categories
Immigration Legal, Laws, and Regs

US vs Abbott and the border didn’t work anyway

One particular passage stands out for me.

The courts have to consider every argument raised in self-defense in a court case. Including Texas’ assertion that it was protecting itself “against an invasion.”

‘Here, Texas’s self-defense argument does not preclude the issuance of a preliminary injunction. First, the district court adequately considered Texas’s arguments. Further, the district court, mindful of the sensitive nature of the parties’ interests in this case, sought to expeditiously seek a determination on the merits.

Finally, the gravity of Texas’s argument—
particularly the constitutional implications of a single state’s ability to declare it is invaded and select its own means of waging war—suggests it would be best considered on a fully developed record.’
“…the constitutional implications of a single state’s ability to declare it is invaded and select its own means of waging war…”

Think about what Abbott and his pet AG Paxton are saying…that they have been invaded and they can choose the means with which to wage war.

Think about how bad the Fifth and SCOTUS have become for a state to believe that it, not the US government, can declare an invasion and wage a war. This is tantamount to Texas declaring itself independent of the US.

And as the two (liberal-appointed) circuit judges noted:

The barrier didn’t work, anyway.

Decision

Categories
Immigration Legal, Laws, and Regs

US vs Abbott an Appeals win

Remember my pet case, US vs Abbott? About Texas building a saw-bladed buoy system in the middle of the Rio Grande?

The Fifth circuit just ruled in the US favor, with the dissenting judge catching the line Thomas threw, attempting to completely overthrow the Clean Water laws.

It was a win, but a win that leaves me worried.

Opinion

Categories
Immigration Legal, Laws, and Regs

US vs Abbott Amended Complaint

Pet case update time again. US vs Abbott

The US has asked the court’s permission to file an amended complaint. I’ve attached a link to the redlined version showing the changes.

I wondered why in the hell the US lawyers didn’t including the Mexican treaty in the original complaint. That should take priority over the Rivers and Harbors Act. And it reduces the likelihood that this case is going to be the wedge to begin destruction of federal control over rivers.

I think they thought* RHA would be sufficient, and in normal times with normal courts, it would have been.

But these aren’t normal times, and the days of normal courts are over.

*And, it must be noted, there are new DOJ lawyers attached to the case.

Exhibit Redline of First Amended Complaint

Categories
Immigration Legal, Laws, and Regs

US vs Abbott and filing flurry

A flurry of filings in my pet case, US v Abbott, related to Texas’ appeal.

In the Texas brief, Abbott brags about all the arrests related to Operation Lone Star. Which means it’s a good time to also bring up the ProPublica piece that made mincemeat of these claims.

The rest of Abbott’s filing is a joke. Best part: Abbott seems to be claiming that he, and he alone, can declare war in Texas. And he can declare war any time he wants.

And still no answer to my questions:

Are drugs being taped to migrant backs as they cross the river? Do they use some kind of waterproof wrapping or something?

I mean, if these buoys are necessary to stop the drug trade, I want to know how the heck they’re keeping them dry.

The fact that this thing is still ongoing is solely, SOLELY because of SCOTUS corruption.

Court Document

ProPublica piece