Appeal Pushed in Sheriff Joe vs Obama

by -
Sheriff Joe vs Obama

Last month, Obama appointed Judge Beryl Howell dismissed a case filed by legal gadfly Larry Klayman on behalf of his client Sheriff Joe Arapio.

The suit challenges President Obama’s authority to grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants through executive action.

Klayman, who has an established reputation of tenacity, appealed the ruling and is now asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to accelerate the appeal process.

Upon filing the motion for an accelerated hearing, Klayman stated, “As the old adage goes, justice delayed is justice denied. The D.C. Circuit has a duty to move quickly to protect the citizens of Arizona and the nation from the harmful effects of allowing for the continued horde of illegal criminal aliens who will not now be deported to remain in the United States, as was required under existing law before Obama issued his executive actions. And, an early decision will also allow the Supreme Court discretion to review Obama’s executive actions at the earliest practicable time.”

According to Sheriff Arpaio: “This act by the President will have a serious detrimental impact on my carrying out the duties and responsibilities for which I am encharged as Sheriff. Specifically, if a preliminary injunction is not swiftly entered, Obama’s illegal executive actions will severely strain and cause severe harm to our crime-fighting resources, both in manpower and financially, necessary to protect the citizens I was elected to serve.”

Klayman and Arapio may not fare better in front of the appeals court. Of the 11 judges assigned to the D.C. Court of Appeals, four are Obama appointees; four are Bush appointees (father and son), along with three Clinton-appointed judges.

Cases brought before courts of appeal are heard before a three-judge panel. While the assignment of the panel is supposed to be neutral, courts have been caught “panel-packing” in the past, specifically in civil rights cases in 1963.