In a blow to amnesty opponents Friday, a federal appeals court dismissed a case brought by outspoken Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio challenging Barack Obama’s executive actions on immigration:
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia affirmed a lower court opinion and concluded that Arpaio did not have the legal right — or standing — to bring the challenge.
“We conclude that Sheriff Arpaio has failed to allege an injury that is both fairly traceable to the deferred action policies and redressable by enjoining them, as our standing precedents require, ” wrote Judge Nina Pillard, an Obama appointee.
[…]
Arpaio, the sheriff of Maricopa County, has taken a strong and at times incendiary stance against illegal immigration. He recently settled a lawsuit with the Department of Justice concerning allegations of discrimination and the unlawful detention of Hispanics.
Arpaio brought the immigration suit in part because he argued that the President’s policies would inhibit his ability to perform his job. In Court papers, Larry Klayman, Arpaio’s lawyer, argued that the sheriff’s offices would be burdened by increased workload and financial pressure and the county would face an increased influx of undocumented immigrants.
The government contended that Arpaio didn’t have legal standing to bring the suit.
Despite the dismissal of Arpaio’s case, a second case brought by Texas and 25 other states is still awaiting decision in New Orleans’ Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
