The Ninth Circuit Appeals Court upheld a restraining order, originally issued by a California federal court, prohibiting ICE from arresting individuals based solely on their apparent race or ethnicity, Spanish language use, or presence in specific locations. This ruling confirmed the unconstitutionality of ICE’s practices, which appeared to be driven by an undocumented arrest quota, despite government claims to the contrary. However, ICE seemingly ignored this legal directive, as evidenced by a video showing agents conducting a mass arrest in a Home Depot parking lot the very next day. This blatant disregard of the court order highlights a broader issue of government agencies acting with impunity, effectively daring authorities to enforce constitutional rights.
Read More
Judge Alsup denied the Trump administration’s request to stay his order reinstating thousands of unlawfully fired probationary federal employees. The judge cited the increasing difficulty of reinstatement with each passing day and the government’s attempts to obstruct the legal process. Alsup deemed the administration’s mass firings a sham, designed to circumvent statutory requirements, and rejected the DOJ’s arguments regarding administrative burdens and speculative harm claims. He emphasized that OPM cannot direct agencies to fire employees under the guise of guidance, and the administration’s refusal to provide testimony further demonstrated its obstructive tactics. The DOJ intends to appeal the ruling to the Ninth Circuit.
Read More
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals largely upheld Idaho’s “abortion trafficking” law, reversing a lower court’s decision that had blocked its enforcement. While the court found the law’s prohibition on “recruiting” minors for abortions unconstitutionally broad, it upheld provisions against “harboring” and “transporting” them for abortions. The plaintiffs’ attorney expressed satisfaction with the partial block, emphasizing the protection of speech related to abortion care, while Idaho’s Attorney General celebrated the ruling as a victory for protecting the unborn. The case may proceed to the district court.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker