Refugee Resettlement Watch

Jeff Sessions’ Justice Department planning to ask for dismissal of TN refugee case; feds say they lack time to deal with it!

Posted by Ann Corcoran on May 10, 2017

Gee, I wonder why they are so busy?  Of course, you would be living under a rock if you didn’t know that the Dept. of Justice recommended (and the President concurred) firing the Obama-appointed Director of the FBI, James Comey, yesterday.

I joked on twitter that the reason for the firing was because Comey admitted to Congress (without prompting!) that 300 refugees are in the pool of 2,000 cases being investigated by the FBI for reaching out to foreign terrorists.  See yesterday’s pre-firing post here.

In my opinion, in the long run, this Tennessee case is more important for the future of this country than anything to do with James Comey’s firing!

So why does the Trump Justice Department not have enough lawyers to handle a couple of big issues at once?

Now here is what The Tennessean is reporting yesterday about the lawsuit we watched being developed for years.  New readers might want to check this post when the case was filed in March for some background.

The federal government will ask for a dismissal of Tennessee’s lawsuit over refugee resettlement, according to document filed in federal court on Monday.

While seeking more time to file their request, attorneys for the Department of Justice said Tennessee lacks standing and “their claim is unripe.”

In March, Tennessee became the first state in the nation to sue the federal government over refugee resettlement, citing a violation by federal officials of the 10th Amendment. The amendment says the federal government possesses only the powers delegated to it by the U.S. Constitution, with all other powers reserved for the states.

The lawsuit argues the federal government has unduly forced states to pay for refugee resettlement programs.

The federal refugee act was designed to create a permanent procedure for the admission of refugees into the United States.

The lawsuit asks the court to force the federal government to stop resettling refugees in Tennessee until all costs associated with the settlement are incurred by the federal government.

In a brief response to the state’s lawsuit, federal attorneys say the state’s claims “lacks merit.”

Chad Readler, former Jones Day attorney, heads the Civil Rights Division responsible for the case. http://www.law.umich.edu/newsandinfo/features/Pages/ChadReadler_050917.aspx

Give me a break! Hire more lawyers if you can’t get the work done!

While explaining that they’d like until June 1 to prepare for their request for dismissal of the lawsuit, DOJ attorneys say they’ve been preoccupied with other matters.

“Defendants’ counsel have worked diligently to prepare their motion to dismiss, but due to the number and complexity of the issues, and the unexpectedly heavy press and urgency of business in other litigation for which undersigned counsel is responsible, Defendants require additional time,” the filing states.

Chad Readler, who has been involved in federal court cases related to President Donald Trump’s executive action on sanctuary cities, is among several attorneys for the federal government handling Tennessee’s lawsuit.

Continue reading here.

Silver lining….

The Thomas More Law Center does excellent work and if Trump’s Justice Department doesn’t keep the case out of court (as they appear to be aiming to do!) then a lack of knowledgeable and skilled federal attorneys defending the UN/US Refugee Admissions Program may be a good thing!

Always a very wild card these days is if the case is heard by a politicized judge!

21 Responses to “Jeff Sessions’ Justice Department planning to ask for dismissal of TN refugee case; feds say they lack time to deal with it!”

  1. 12 Jones Day Lawyers Take Key Posts in Trump Administration

    Marcia Coyle and C. Ryan Barber, The National Law Journal

    January 20, 2017 |

    ►Chad Readler will serve as principal deputy assistant attorney general in the DOJ’s civil division. A former law clerk to Judge Alan Norris of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, Readler serves as chairman of the Ohio Alliance for Public Charter Schools. In 2013, he wrote a guest column for the Cleveland Plain-Dealer that railed against “federal overcriminalization” and noted concerns that the False Claims Act has ensnared contractors who did not intend to defraud the federal government.

    http://www.nationallawjournal.com/id=1202777272340/12-Jones-Day-Lawyers-Take-Key-Posts-in-Trump-Administration?slreturn=20170411075754

    Like

  2. Phonographnut@aol.com said

    turns out Trump is a liar too hopeless

    Like

  3. krew09 said

    at the end of the day Thomas Moore is a 501c3…which means they are under federal dictate…here Congressman Cleaver makes it clear that 501c3’s are told what they can and can’t do,what they can and can’t say by IRS and ACLU attorneys.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R48n0QTkyEc
    that a church or any other organization is 501c3 is problematic

    Like

    • The Thomas More Law Center, named after the Roman Catholic patron saint of lawyers and founded by Domino’s pizza tycoon Tom Monaghan, is a conservative Christian legal advocacy organization based in Ann Arbor, Michigan.

      One of its more prominent cases was its defense of the Dover PA School Board in the Kitzmiller case.

      In 2011, the Center sued Barack Hussein Obama in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan over the constitutionality of Obamacare and lost. They appealed the decision

      in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which upheld the lower court’s ruling.[1] In 2001, the Center sued the San Diego chapter of Planned Parenthood to force it to inform women of a possible link between abortions and breast cancer. Clearly fitting the snowball clause, the case was dismissed, with the center ordered to pay legal fees.

      http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Thomas_More_Law_Center

      Like

    • Because PAST is Prologue, we have seen how corrupt an IRS employee can be, in this ‘that 501c3’s are told what they can and can’t do,what they can and can’t say by IRS and ACLU attorneys.’

      Like

  4. southofcincy said

    What a smack in the face. Maybe the Immigration Reform Law Institute can volunteer some time……. (‘IRLI is a public interest law firm working to defend the rights and interests of the American people from the negative effects of mass migration.’)

    Liked by 1 person

  5. WHEN the Trump Administration realizes that the third and fourth tier of Government employees SHOULD BE FIRED FROM GOVERNMENT SERVICE, and replace with Trump Policy Friendly Employees, THEN AND ONLY THEN, will this Country can continue to operate SWAMP FREE of those who are frustrating implimentation of Trump policy.

    There is an estimated total, of between three and four thousand OBAMA FRIENDLY employees…as per Mark Levin,

    Trump will then TRULY DRAIN THE SWAMP and at the same time be able to drive his Policy, and have a sizeable patronage GRIP on the RAT LIBERALS who now populate Government Service AGAINST Trump.

    UNTIL THAT TIME, it will be tough slogging, against Trump Immigration Policy and things like this particular case.

    Trump is already DRAINING the Federal court judiciary of these RAT LIBERALS…and with Comey unceremonious firing, it should be the Beginning of this CLEAN SWEEP.

    DRAIN THE SWAMP DRAIN THE SWAMP DRAIN THE SWAMP.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. krew09 said

    states used to have their own immigration agencies…The Federal govt just gives citizenship,but the states have last say on who resides in them.
    ———–
    The great Chief Justice John Marshall reminds us the “Constitution of the United States is one of limited and expressly delegated powers which can only be exercised as granted, or in cases enumerated.” For Congress, there is no expressed or implied grant of power over the admission of immigrants to enter and take up residency within any State limits – no more than there is a power to instruct Tokyo to absorb one million refugees. As Jefferson would say of today’s laws over immigration, “is not law, but is altogether void and of no force.”

    Holmes v. Jennison, 14 Pet 540; Groves v. Slaughter, 15 Pet 449, and in Prigg v. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 16 Pet 539. These cases decide that the States have the power to expel and exclude. There can be no concurrent power respecting such a subject matter.

    Thomas Jefferson forcibly tells us what the States retained under the US Constitution in regards to immigration:

    [A]lien friends are under the jurisdiction and protection of the laws of the state wherein they are; that no power over them has been delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the individual states, distinct from their power over citizens; and it being true, as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited to the states, are reserved, to the states, respectively, or to the people,” the act of the Congress of the United States, passed the 22d day of June, 1798, entitled “An Act concerning Aliens,” which assumes power over alien friends not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void and of no force.

    The Vermont Constitution of 1793 recognized citizens right to emigrate from state to state, provided the laws of the state accepted them. James Madison explained the entire compact this way:

    The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.

    Chief Justice of the United States, John Marshall, said, in delivering the unanimous opinion of his brethren of the court in McCulloch v. Maryland, decided in 1819:

    “No political dreamer was ever wild enough to think of breaking down the lines which separate the States, and of compounding the American people into into one common mass. Of consequence, when they act, they act in their States. … In America, the powers of sovereignty are divided between the government of the Union, and those of the States. They are each sovereign, with respect to the objects committed to it, and neither sovereign with respect to the objects committed to the other. ”

    The same Congress that had passed reconstruction acts after the civil war, including the 14th amendment, required rebel State Constitutions to conform to the US Constitution before being re-admitted into the Union. Texas, like other States, had elected to form its own immigration bureau for managing immigration within State limits. Article XI of the pre-approved Texas Constitution of 1869 read:

    SECTION I. There shall be a Bureau, known as the “Bureau of Immigration,” which shall have supervision and control of all matters connected with immigration. The head of this Bureau shall be styled the “Superintendent of Immigration.” He shall be appointed by the Governor, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. He shall hold his office for four years, and until otherwise fixed by law, shall receive an annual compensation of two thousand dollars. He shall have such further powers and duties, connected with immigration, as may be given by law.

    Most all the States had their own “immigration commissioners” in a number of European countries before and after the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, seeking to encourage those persons who possessed certain needed skills to immigrate to their State. When immigration of any kind became unwise the State had the full power to act on the subject (unlike today).

    For example, the commissioner of the Wisconsin Labor Bureau discovered in 1886 after making inquires throughout the State that there was an overwhelming resentment against immigrants entering the state labor market. A year later, a bill was passed in both houses without a single dissenting vote to abolish the State Board of Immigration to end encouragement of immigration into the State.

    Like

    • Ann Corcoran said

      Okay, everybody, I suggest that long comments be reserved for posting at your own blogs.

      Like

  7. Yeah sure ….. Why doesn’t Trump/Sessions just CONCEDE and save America? Can WE just tell the government WE do not have time to fill out their stupid income tax forms??!!

    Like

  8. Ann- I don’t know if you saw this article on Drudge today that claims there are fewer refugees entering the US today.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/far-fewer-refugees-entering-us-despite-travel-ban-053557772–politics.html

    Based on your excellent research and this blog, it seems like there’s a lot of misinformation out there coming from the MSM.

    Here’s a quote from the article:

    “The U.S. resettlement process provides more stringent background checks than any other mode of entry in the country, and there is no evidence that refugees are more likely to commit violent acts. According to analysis conducted by the Cato Institute, a libertarian policy think tank, the chance of an American being murdered by a refugee in a terrorist attack is just 1 in 3.64 billion per year.”

    The Tennessee case is mentioned in passing but not the fact that as you pointed out, it is being challenged by none other than the Trump Admin.

    When are the patriotic citizens and taxpayers of OUR country going to catch a break?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ann Corcoran said

      I just saw it and plan to write about it!

      Liked by 3 people

      • HOW ABOUT MORE in depth articles explaining the GRIP, these Obama HOLD OVERS are frustrating the Trump Administration and in this case, implimentation of Trump immigration policy ?????

        STOP CODDLING THEM with your HANDS OFF policy in criticism of these low tier Obama-Liberal factotums !

        SHOW READERS how it works, in the lower recesses of Government ?

        Like

        • WHY isn’t this aspect of policy implimentation being given to readers here…EVEN THE NY SLIME & POLITICO are writing about this !

          How about some scholarship and LESS shrill Complaining all the time ? THIS IS THE REALITY of what has been going on !

          Meet the Obama Holdovers Who Survived Trump’s Sweep – The New York Times

          Trump’s advisers push him to purge Obama appointees

          http://politi.co/2mjPPtt via @politico

          Like

        • Ann Corcoran said

          Do you have information to share about these people? I know MP Leahy did some stories at Breitbart. But do you have others?

          Liked by 1 person

          • google & bookmark what you believe to be reliable information sources…it’s ALL out there

            Find pundits…for want of a better word for them…that Challenge The Mind and look deeper than just talking about the best meatball recipies.

            Mark Levin gives a legal and historical context to his perceptions of current events…and subjects he is personally expert at. He presents his ‘take’ on an intellectual historical context and he does NOT pander…his aim is to educate not manipulate your Feelings about things.

            Levin served as ‘worked in the administration of President Ronald Reagan and was a chief of staff for Attorney General Edwin Meese. He is president of the Landmark Legal Foundation, has authored six books, and contributes commentary to various media outlets such as National Review Online. On September 1, 2015, Levin was named Editor-in-Chief of Conservative Review.’

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Levin#cite_note-1

            Levin’s legal foundation got Bill Clinton disbarred in AK at the height of his impeachment proceedings…. http://www.landmarklegal.org/DesktopFrame.aspx?frame=LONGTEXT&itemid=347

            Take a listen to what he says…http://www.marklevinshow.com/audio-rewind/

            Like

          • Ann Corcoran said

            Not a fan of Levin.

            Like

    • krew09 said

      of course (((Drudge))) and (((Yahoo))) and all the other mass media outlets say this ….You know if it were true Yahoo would be screaming bloody murder instead of just ho-hum stating refugee #’s are down

      Like

    • TwoLaine said

      The CATO Institute is associated with the Koch Brothers. The Koch brothers WANT REFUGEES. They are obviously going to put out false info and drivel to control the media narrative and the minds of Americans.

      I see they are still lying about the “vetting” of refugees.

      Liked by 1 person

      • I guess it’s LIBERTARIAN DRIVEL !

        The Cato Institute is a libertarian think tank founded by Charles G. Koch and funded by the Koch brothers. It is headquartered in Washington, D.C. The Institute states that it favors policies “that are consistent with the traditional American principles of limited government, individual liberty, and peace.”[1] Cato scholars conduct policy research on a broad range of public policy issues and produce books, studies, op-eds, and blog posts. They are also frequent guests in the media.

        The Cato Institute is an “associate” member of the State Policy Network, a web of right-wing “think tanks” in every state across the country.[2] They are also part of the international Atlas Group network with links to the Institute for Humane Studies. The Independent Institute seems to operate as a Cato subsidiary.

        http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Cato_Institute

        Like

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

 
%d bloggers like this: