The latest blow to the rule of law was delivered by an Obama-appointed federal judge in South Florida.
A United States Federal Court, led by an Obama-appointed federal judge in South Florida, for the second time, ruled that illegal immigrants living in the U.S. can sue American employers that abide by the law and refuse to hire them because they lack sufficient credentials proving they are allowed to work legally in the U.S. This is truly outrageous and beyond comprehension.
Here is more on this ruling via Judicial Watch:
“For the second time in a few years, a federal court has ruled that illegal immigrants can sue American employers that refuse to hire them because they require workers to be U.S. citizens or legal residents (green card holders). The latest blow to the rule of law was delivered by an Obama-appointed federal judge in South Florida, who handed a powerful open-borders group a huge victory in a case accusing a major U.S. company of discriminating against an illegal immigrant.
Though years apart, both lawsuits were filed by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), a leftist group that specializes in discrimination lawsuits on behalf of illegal immigrants and has Chicago ties to Obama. MALDEF pushes for free college tuition for illegal immigrants and lowering educational standards to accommodate new migrants. Its leadership refers to the U.S. government’s immigration enforcement effort as racist and xenophobic and says it’s racist to make English the country’s official national language and inhumane to protect the southern border with a fence. Both MALDEF victories involve plaintiffs who benefit from a special Obama amnesty known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) that shields nearly 800,000 illegal aliens under the age of 31 from deportation.
In the recent Florida case a Venezuelan immigrant, David Rodriguez, living in Miami is suing consumer goods corporation Procter & Gamble for refusing to give him a paid internship because he is not a legal resident or citizen of the United States. MALDEF filed the lawsuit last year in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Procter & Gamble requires citizenship and immigration status information on its applications and warns that candidates “must be a U.S. citizen or national, refugee, asylee or lawful permanent resident.” Rodriquez is neither and he quickly played the discrimination card after getting nixed as a candidate. In a statement MALDEFF’s president reminds that “work-authorized DACA holders are valuable contributors to our economy” and “should not have to face arbitrary and biased exclusions from employment, especially by large and sophisticated corporations like Procter & Gamble.”
Judge Kathleen M. Williams, a former public defender appointed to the federal bench by Obama in 2011, agrees, citing MALDEF’s other lawsuit in her ruling. In denying Procter & Gamble’s motion to dismiss Rodriguez’s lawsuit, Judge Williams claims the Venezuelan immigrant’s claims are “strikingly similar” to those in MALDEF’s 2014 suit against insurance company Northwestern Mutual in New York. In that complaint, a Mexican illegal alien protected by DACA alleged that Northwestern Mutual’s policy requiring him to have a green card because he’s not a U.S. citizen discriminated against him. Requiring the Mexican national, Ruben Juarez, to provide proof of legal residency imposed an additional burden that constitutes alienage discrimination, according to the complaint filed on his behalf by MALDEF. The federal judge hearing that case in New York agreed and, in a federal courtroom more than 1,000 miles south, Williams used the decision to justify hers.
“In Juarez, the plaintiff was a DACA recipient who was denied employment based on Northwestern Mutual’s policy to only hire U.S. citizens and green card holders,” Judge Williams writes in her ruling. “There, on strikingly similar facts, the court found that Northwestern Mutual’s policy impermissibly discriminated against a subclass of Iawfully present aliens.” The ruling continues to say that Procter & Gamble’s policy could be construed to discriminate against a subset of legal aliens, which are protected. It seems to agree with the illegal alien’s assertions that Procter & Gamble has a “facially discriminatory employment policy” for requiring candidates to furnish proof that they’re in the U.S. legally.”
The plaintiff in this ruling was a DACA recipient who was denied employment because of a Northwestern Mutual policy which professes to only hire U.S. Citizens and green card holders.
The Obama appointed judge, in this case, ruled that there are striking similarities between this case and the one that found that Northwestern Mutual’s policy impermissibly discriminated against a subclass of Lawfully present aliens. In said ruling it was written that Procter & Gamble’s policy could be interpreted to discriminate against a particular group of legal aliens, which are protected and it seems to agree with the illegal alien’s assertions that Procter & Gamble has a “facially discriminatory employment policy” for requiring candidates to furnish proof that they’re in the U.S. legally. WHAT?
So do we have laws in this country or don’t we? Isn’t every employer in the nation supposed to be using e-verify? How many sets of different rules can a nation have? Illegal is illegal, no matter when they got here or who brought them here.
The truth of the matter is that Obama, during his 8 years in office, lined the federal courts with nothing more than far left wing liberal judges. As those on the right were busy trying to get Obamacare repealed and preserving our God-given right to defend ourselves, Obama was slowly and quietly turning our nation’s court system into an extreme left-wing legislative branch. And we, as a society, will be paying for this for decades to come.
Elections have consequences!