Tweet
Stalling: Sheriff Joe Arpaio's Attorney Larry Klayman Responds; Obama Misses Deadline!?
Birther Report
12/9/2014
Excerpt:
Team Obama Stalling: Sheriff Joe Arpaio's Attorney Larry Klayman Responds; Obama Misses Deadline!?
As reported last night, the Department of Justice on behalf of Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Jeh Johnson, and Leon Rodriquez, filed their response to Sheriff Arpaio's lawsuit seeking an injunction to halt Obama's unconstitutional illegal immigration action. Team Obama whined they were confused but admitted they were served.
Attorney Larry Klayman submitted the following December 9th, 2014:
[ Full Statement Embedded ...]
Team Obama was ordered to respond today by 5:00 PM ET, as of this writing, no published filing is available...
You can read every filing thus far in Arpaio v. Obama, et al., lawsuit .... Statement embedded ......
View the complete Birther Report presentation at:
http://www.birtherreport.com/2014/12...-attorney.html
Birther Report
12/9/2014
Excerpt:
Team Obama Stalling: Sheriff Joe Arpaio's Attorney Larry Klayman Responds; Obama Misses Deadline!?
As reported last night, the Department of Justice on behalf of Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Jeh Johnson, and Leon Rodriquez, filed their response to Sheriff Arpaio's lawsuit seeking an injunction to halt Obama's unconstitutional illegal immigration action. Team Obama whined they were confused but admitted they were served.
Attorney Larry Klayman submitted the following December 9th, 2014:
PLAINTIFF’S STATEMENT ON BRIEFING SCHEDULING OF MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
Plaintiff, pursuant to the Court’s Order of December 4, 2014, hereby files this statement. U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell ordered that the Plaintiff consult with the Defendants’ counsel and develop and file by this next Tuesday, December 9, 2014, by 5:00 PM a “joint proposed schedule to govern the preliminary injunction proceedings.”
The parties have not reached agreement as to the timetable for briefing and hearing Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction.
Pursuant to Local Rule 65.1, a hearing is to be held 21 days from the date of filing, which was last Thursday, December 4th.
The Plaintiff proposes to have Defendants file their Opposition to the Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction within 7 days, that is on or before December 15, and then for Plaintiff to file his reply 7 days later on or before December 22.
Plaintiff’s position is buttressed by the fact that the Defendants obviously have already extensively reviewed and analyzed their view of the law and precedents. On November 20, 2014, the Office of Legal Counsel of the U.S. Department of Justice released its 33 page legal memorandum for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
Therefore, the Plaintiff does not accept that more time is needed because the Defendants have not only evidenced but publicly boasted that they have extensively examined these issues legally. Plaintiff, by counsel, contends that the Defendant is merely delaying, much as it did before Judge Leon in the case against the National Security Agency (“NSA”) brought by Larry Klayman and Freedom Watch in 2013. In that case when the U.S. Department of Justice asked for an equally long and unreasonable briefing schedule on a motion for preliminary injunction, here is what Judge Leon had to say: “[w]e work 24/7 around this courthouse. I don’t want to hear anything about vacations, weddings, days off. Forget about it. This is a case at the pinnacle of public national interest, pinnacle. All hands 24/7. No excuses. You got a team of lawyers. Mr. Klayman is alone apparently. You have litigated cases in this courthouse when it is matters of this consequence and enormity. You know how this Court operates.” Transcript of Oct. 31, 2013. [...]
Plaintiff, pursuant to the Court’s Order of December 4, 2014, hereby files this statement. U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell ordered that the Plaintiff consult with the Defendants’ counsel and develop and file by this next Tuesday, December 9, 2014, by 5:00 PM a “joint proposed schedule to govern the preliminary injunction proceedings.”
The parties have not reached agreement as to the timetable for briefing and hearing Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction.
Pursuant to Local Rule 65.1, a hearing is to be held 21 days from the date of filing, which was last Thursday, December 4th.
The Plaintiff proposes to have Defendants file their Opposition to the Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction within 7 days, that is on or before December 15, and then for Plaintiff to file his reply 7 days later on or before December 22.
Plaintiff’s position is buttressed by the fact that the Defendants obviously have already extensively reviewed and analyzed their view of the law and precedents. On November 20, 2014, the Office of Legal Counsel of the U.S. Department of Justice released its 33 page legal memorandum for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
Therefore, the Plaintiff does not accept that more time is needed because the Defendants have not only evidenced but publicly boasted that they have extensively examined these issues legally. Plaintiff, by counsel, contends that the Defendant is merely delaying, much as it did before Judge Leon in the case against the National Security Agency (“NSA”) brought by Larry Klayman and Freedom Watch in 2013. In that case when the U.S. Department of Justice asked for an equally long and unreasonable briefing schedule on a motion for preliminary injunction, here is what Judge Leon had to say: “[w]e work 24/7 around this courthouse. I don’t want to hear anything about vacations, weddings, days off. Forget about it. This is a case at the pinnacle of public national interest, pinnacle. All hands 24/7. No excuses. You got a team of lawyers. Mr. Klayman is alone apparently. You have litigated cases in this courthouse when it is matters of this consequence and enormity. You know how this Court operates.” Transcript of Oct. 31, 2013. [...]
[ Full Statement Embedded ...]
Team Obama was ordered to respond today by 5:00 PM ET, as of this writing, no published filing is available...
You can read every filing thus far in Arpaio v. Obama, et al., lawsuit .... Statement embedded ......
View the complete Birther Report presentation at:
http://www.birtherreport.com/2014/12...-attorney.html