Judge Rejects Ariz. Sheriff’s Suit Over Immigration Actions

[alp227]

Source: Legal Times

A Washington federal judge on Tuesday night dismissed an Arizona sheriff’s lawsuit challenging the Obama administration’s executive action on immigration. Read the ruling here.

The judge, Beryl Howell of U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, said the challenger, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, lacks standing to challenge the constitutionality of the immigration action.

Howell rejected Arpaio’s request for a preliminary injunction and granted the U.S. Department of Justice’s request to dismiss the case. A lawyer for Arpaio filed an immediate notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

Read more: http://www.nationallawjournal.com/legaltimes/home/id=1202713345258/Judge-Rejects-Ariz-Sheriffs-Suit-Over-Immigration-Actions

---

And guess who represented Joe Blow? Birther and cranky man extraordinaire (and possible child molester too, see link), Larry Klayman.

[Cha]

1. Haha! thanks alp~

[SoapBox]

2. Suck on they, Sheriff Ahole!

And now, with driver's licenses being issued in AZ...

I bet I know how he looks!

[freshwest]

3. When is Joe going to be deported?

[elleng]

4. The key question in this case

however, concerns the appropriate forum for where this
national conversation should occur. The doctrine of standing, in both its constitutional and
prudential formulations, concerns itself with “‘the proper—and properly limited—role of the
courts in a democratic society.’”

Standing “ensures that [courts] act as judges, and do not
engage in policymaking properly left to elected representatives.”

The refusal to adjudicate a claim should not be confused with abdicating the
responsibility of judicial review. “Proper regard for the complex nature of our constitutional
structure requires neither that the Judicial Branch shrink from a confrontation with the other two
coequal branches of the Federal Government, nor that it hospitably accept for adjudication
claims of constitutional violation by other branches of government where the claimant has not
suffered cognizable injury.”

[BeanMusical]

5. Joe Arpaio?

The maniac? The racist asshole? Well I'm glad that a judge dismissed his crap but this guy have no business being a sheriff and he belongs in jail.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

7. Wearing all pink undergarments and outerwear.

And being sodomized with a green pineapple every Sunday morning.

[Monk06]

6. The substance of your claim must be that you were personally harmed by the defendant. That is what

standing is. These lawsuits should be regarded as trivial and court costs retrieved from the plaintiff.


Arpaio made a reputation for frugality by feeding his inmates baloney sandwiches and dressing them in pink underwear. Yet he runs one of the most costly and corrupt Sheriff's departments in the country.

[Gothmog]

8. Sheriff Joe is senile

This lawsuit was stupid even for Sheriff Joe. He did not have standing to bring this case

[Coventina]

9. It's all about keeping himself in the public eye and pandering to his racist supporters.

Even when losing, he wins.