Obama Considering Going Full Dictator

From The Hill via H/T at Ace of Spades HQ:

A newly leaked internal DHS memorandum produced for an off-the-record agency conclave reveals that the Obama administration is actively planning to circumvent a federal court injunction that suspended part of last November's deferral-based amnesty initiative. The document, apparently prepared as follow-up from a DHS "Regulations Retreat" last summer, appears sure to re-ignite concerns in Congress as well as federal judges in the Fifth Circuit. The Administration has already been criticized from the bench for handing out work permits to hundreds of thousands of deferred action beneficiaries, in direct violation of a district court's order. With the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals deciding any day now whether to deny the Administration's request to reverse that injunction, this public leak has come at a critical juncture for U.S. enforcement policy.
..................

Will the 26 plaintiff states that have challenged the President’s DAPA program bring this memo to the Fifth Circuit’s attention, before they issue their closely-awaited decision? If this document is indeed the cutting edge of Obama’s strategy for DHS to circumvent Judge Hanen’s injunction order, it would confirm the Administration’s bad faith and contempt both for the court and the law.

I wouldn't be surprised to the documents authenticity. And considering this Regime's past history, it comes as no surprise.

Stop Saying Same-Sex Marriage is the 'Law of the Land'

From The American Thinker Blog:

Ever notice that radical leftists never say, "It's the law of the land" when speaking of a national law they fundamentally disagree with?

Barack Obama and the Defense of Marriage Act is a glaring example. DOMA was the law of the land, but Mr. Obama's Justice Department refused to enforce the law, and the Department was the only agency responsible for its enforcement.

Curiously, the establishment press didn't draw attention to Obama's blatant dereliction of duty over DOMA. The press did not assert that the Justice Department was in "rebellion" and the executive branch had a "duty" to execute "the law of the land" and "get over it."

In my experience, the answer is a resounding , NO!

America's Descent Into Lawlessness

From Victor Davis Hanson at National Review:

In the eight-plus years since the Libby trial, the Obama administration has blown up the law as we have known it for centuries.

Barack Obama once warned Latino activists that he had no legal authority to suspend enforcement of federal immigration law, stop deportations, and offer de facto amnesties.

But that caution was only a campaigning talking point. After his re-election in 2012 and the midterm elections in 2014, Obama made a mockery of immigration law.

Hundreds of liberal sanctuary cities have announced that federal immigration law does not apply to them. That scary, neo-Confederate idea of legal nullification was sanctioned by the Obama administration — in a way it never would have been if a city had suspended the Endangered Species Act, emissions standards, or gun-control legislation.

As a result, once-detained and later-released immigrants with criminal records have murdered innocent American citizens.

America is becoming analogous to the mess in lawless contemporary Venezuela. When the law is suspended or unevenly applied for politically protected individuals and groups, then there is no law.

So we are now seeing the logical descent into the abyss of chaos.

Read the whole article. It may take decades to repair the damage to the system by the Dear Leader.

Hold Sanctuary Cities Liable For Crimes

From Breitbart California:

What would be your reaction to an announcement by your local elected leaders that they would no longer be cooperating with federal law enforcement officials regarding bank robbery laws?

Or what if they declared that your city or county would cease prosecution of federal human trafficking laws, or that they believed it was no longer necessary to ensure prosecution of federal kidnapping laws?

Yet when city after city and county after county in our nation announce they have chosen selectively to ignore federal immigration laws that they believe are harsh or unfair by implementing sanctuary city policies, their citizens are silent—or, worse applaud their actions. Well, the time has come to put a stop to this insanity.

Ki Davis, the County Clerk in Kentucky, was sent to jail, for contempt of court, for not issuing gay marriage licenses, in violation of Federal Mandate.

While I support Kate’s Law, I’d like to suggest a much harsher solution, one that would more sharply focus the attention of elected officials who believe compassion for an illegal alien felon is more important than the public safety of residents. It’s well known that corporations and businesses face significant civil and even criminal liabilities if their actions expose customers or even the general public to danger or harm.
............................

Unfortunately for Kate’s family, like the family of Anthony Bologna and his sons—murdered by an illegal alien felon and MS-13 gang member—elected officials like the Sheriff of San Francisco or the members of the Board of Supervisors can’t be subjected to legal actions filed by the victims of their recklessness because of a legal doctrine broadly known as “sovereign immunity” or Rex Non Potest Peccare, roughly meaning “the King can do no wrong.”
............................

When governmental actions result in harm or death, cities, officials in counties and even states like California that carry out policies that seek to avoid or stop enforcing certain laws should be forced to face the consequences of their actions by having their immunity stripped.

As I noted at the beginning of this article, we’d be astounded if our elected officials announced that they would begin selectively enforcing other laws in our society.

That astonishment would be based on our collective understanding that selective enforcement of law is essentially the equivalent of having no law.

It's called chaos. These politicians, who vote for sanctuary city policies know they can't be held liable for their actions. They do it for the applause (and campaign dollars) from the media and vocal special interest groups.

Is the West Dead Yet?

From Victor Davis Hanson at National Review via H/T at Instapundit:

Not yet, but Obama's trying.......

Immigration is a one-way Western street. Those who, in the abstract, damn the West — as much as elite Westerners themselves do — want very much to live inside it. The loudest anti-Western voices in the Middle East are usually housed in Western universities, not in Gaza. Jorge Ramos is a fierce critic of supposed American cruelty to illegal immigrants — so much so that he fled Mexico for America, became a citizen (how is that possible, given American bias against immigrants?), landed a multimillion-dollar salary working for the non-Latino-owned Spanish-language network Univision, and then put his kids in private school to shield them from hoi polloi of the sort he champions each evening. Now that’s the power of the West.
.......................

But it is worse than that: Western elites deny their own exceptionalism, and deny any reason for their own privilege other than the easy private guilt of citing the Holy Trinity of “race/class/gender.” . . .

The first casualty in a bored and would-be-revolutionary society is legality. And certainly in the West the law — whose sanctity built Western civilization — has become a joke. New Confederate-style nullificationists in San Francisco demand that federal immigration statutes not apply to their sanctuary city, even as they insist that a minor clerk in Kentucky be jailed for nullifying a Supreme Court edict allowing gay marriage. Kim Davis should indeed be jailed for obstructing a federal mandate, but only after the neo-Confederate nullificationist mayor, Board of Supervisors, and sheriff of San Francisco ..........

Virtually every American must palpably sense the country’s rapid decline since President Obama assumed office. It’s not just economic stagnation; it’s a moral, religious, cultural and legal free fall that turns the stomach. That’s why the 2016 presidential election isn’t so much about needing an “experienced” politician (i.e., someone who cares more about being a member of the D.C. club than listening to Americans living outside D.C.), or even the candidates’ positions on particular issues.

It’s about a desperate, visceral longing for someone who believes that America is the greatest force for good on earth, that it occupies a special position of power that in large part determines the stability and prosperity of the globe, and that its own goodness and quest for fairness should not be used against it by those who plot to destroy it from within.

As we free fall from the Obama era of weakness and indecision, Americans’ top priority seems to be avoiding career politicians whose well-rehearsed, mellifluous, politically correct words instinctively smack of arrogance, weakness, guilt, insincerity or paternalism. D.C. has turned into the Capitol city portrayed in the Hunger Games–corrupt, privileged, arrogant, condescending, manipulative, shallow, materialistic, weak, and utterly ignorant of the needs of those who live beyond its borders.

The political class has forgotten who is actually “boss” in our constitutional republic– We the People outside of D.C. The boss is now interviewing presidential candidates to ascertain who understands this basic principle, and accepts that the job description entails being the leader of ordinary (not merely elite) Americans, and a staunch defender of American interests.

The political elites in this country are apoplectic that their “insider” candidates are doing so poorly. The rest of the country is enjoying the fact that they have choices other than candidates who espouse the same old interchangeable, predictable, politically correct B.S.

My first thought of the Capitol in The Hunger Games was Washington DC.

Glad to know I'm not the only one.

Working the refs gets dangerous in Texas high-school football game

From Hot Air:

A Friday night football game between John Jay and Marble Falls high schools got ugly after a Jay player got ejected from the game in an altercation with the opposing team. A couple of plays later, one JHS player blind-sided an official, while another speared the man while he was down on the field.
.......................

That may relate to the coordination on this play between the two assailants. Clearly they both had the same idea at the same time, and that doesn’t seem coincidental. The question will be whether anyone else gave them that idea, or whether they were just dumb enough to dream it up on their own. Suffice it to say that any investigation of this incident will also be taking a close look at other players on Jay High School’s football team, and their coaches as well — although it’s very, very difficult to believe that adults would be stupid enough to order this kind of brazen battery on an official. Not impossible, mind you, just very, very difficult. The game had already gotten out of hand earlier, resulting in the earlier ejection, so this at least reflects on the team’s leadership on the sidelines as well as between the lines.

What should be the punishment for this kind of cowardly, cheap-shot attack on a game official?

Opening Bid - Lifetime ban from any high school sports for the players.

If a coach was involved, nationwide lifetime ban for coaching any sport, at any level. Plus criminal charges against that coach.

If the Head Coach was involved, nationwide lifetime ban for any participation on any sport at any level.

Next question, how long before the players will justify their actions, claiming the ref made some type of racial remark.........

I'm will to bet, since it;'s in Texas both players are hispanic. Will be find out they are also illegals/dreamers/anchor babies?

Remember the Rule Of Law Is Only Sacred When It Furthers a Liberal Value.

From Reason via H/T at Instapundit:

Working for the government is not an inalienable right. So Kim Davis, a county clerk in Kentucky, was wrong to refuse same-sex couples marriage licenses in her office. If you're unwilling to enforce the law, you shouldn't be an officer of the state. After all, it's not a clerk's job to ascertain the constitutionality or practicality of a law
.....................

Davis was taken into federal custody Thursday. She was held in contempt of court for refusing to issue same-sex marriage licenses. She now faces potential penalties, fines and prison time. She will almost certainly be destroyed. So there are a few things that are worth contemplating here.
.....................

Let's start with the prevailing hypocrisy surrounding the attacks on Davis, a Democrat, and what it tells us about the state of American political debate and policymaking in 2015—because as you may have noticed, the rule of law only seems to be sacred when it happens to comport with liberal values.

As far as I can tell, there are only three unassailable constitutional rights left in the United States: the right not to be "discriminated" against, the right to have an abortion and the right to have a gay marriage. In the eyes of liberals, nothing—not the freedom of association or religion or anything else mentioned in the First Amendment or Second Amendment—will ever supersede these consecrated rights.

The rest? Well, it's malleable, depending on the situation.

Where is the liberal outrage of sanctuary cities, or not defending a proposition (Prop 8 in California) in court. The President executive Order regarding illegal immigration. How would these same liberal react, if Texas decided to NOT collect Federal Income taxes?