Exclusive: After What This AZ Sheriff Just Said, The Federal Government Better Not Mess With Him

Sheriff Babeu

Hundreds of people gathered at a remote desert location in Oracle, Arizona, early Tuesday to both protest and support the delivery of 40 to 60 illegal immigrant children to Sycamore Canyon Academy in the Catalina Mountains.  A press release had been circulated over the weekend that stated that the Department of Homeland Security would be off-loading unaccompanied minors in Pinal County.  Yet as the day wore on, it became apparent that the buses were not coming.

The Sheriff spoke with reporters at the intersection of Mt. Lemon and Webb Road near the boys’ ranch.

“These unaccompanied juveniles should be put on planes and returned to their country of origin and reunited with their families,” Babeu said.

When asked if he has been working with DHS, Sheriff Babeu said that he had been attempting to reach Jeh Johnson and other top officials by fax, email, and phone.

“There’s a lot of confusion,” Babeu continued. “Even here in Arizona.”

Babeu was told on Tuesday that the unaccompanied immigrants were not coming to the ranch.

“Who’s running this operation?” he asked rhetorically.  “This is where I am not only upset, I’m insulted by the lack of cooperation by the Federal Government.”

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

AZ Governor Goes On Epic Rant Against “Imperial President” Obama

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore (Flickr)

As Western Journalism reported this week, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that Arizona must provide driver’s licenses to the illegals protected under Barack Obama’s executive order known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer has repeatedly stood in support of enforcing America’s immigration laws, earning her state a federal lawsuit as she attempted to perform the job D.C. authorities are apparently unwilling to undertake.

In response to the latest ruling against Arizona, Brewer confirmed she is “analyzing options for appealing the misguided court decision,” adding that residents of her state and beyond have had enough of this administration’s lax response to the current immigration crisis.

As governor of a state disproportionately affected by illegal immigration, Brewer has been one of the most outspoken opponents of Obama’s policies regarding the issue.

In addition to her public statements on the recent court ruling and other federal decisions, a Twitter account in her name offers some biting criticism of the administration – along with promises to continue fighting for a secure border.

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore (Flickr)

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Unbelievable: Court Forces Arizona To Bend Over Backwards For Illegals

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore (Flickr)

Over the past several years, it has been no secret that the Obama administration is trying to prevent Arizona from enforcing federal immigration law. In fact, such a desire to stem the tide of illegals crossing the state’s southern border with Mexico led to a federal lawsuit against Arizona.

A ruling this week by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals further targets the state’s attempt to curtail the ongoing invasion by forcing Arizona to provide driver’s licenses to those young illegals protected by Obama’s executive action.

Gov. Jan Brewer, who has previously taken firm positions against amnesty, commented on the decision in a statement Monday.

“It is outrageous, though not entirely surprising, that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has once again dealt a blow to Arizona’s ability to enforce its laws,” she said.

She went on to note that the three judges on the panel – each appointed by a Democrat president – “disregarded judicial precedent and procedure.”

According to Brewer, Obama not only exacerbated the problem of illegal immigration that is currently affecting her state disproportionately; his administration is also preventing Arizona from acting in its own best interest by upholding existing laws.

“I am analyzing options for appealing the misguided court decision,” she asserted, noting that Americans are “tired and disgusted” by the federal refusal to act.

She promised those disillusioned by the current administration’s stance on amnesty that “Arizona will continue to fight for the rule of law.”

For many pro-illegal activists, however, including the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona’s legal director, the ruling is cause for celebration.

“It’s a very important win for the plaintiffs,” said Dan Pochoda, whom he says “have been very much harmed by this policy, this vindictive policy by the governor.”

Following Obama’s executive order instituting deferred action against certain illegals, Brewer announced her own executive action denying driver’s licenses to these foreign nationals. Supporters of the move – along with Brewer’s legal team – assert the policy cuts down on the unauthorized use of licenses for public assistance and other purposes.

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore (Flickr)

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

SCOTUS To Decide If Arizona Town Is Discriminating Against Churches

supremecourt

The U.S. Supreme Court has handed down a number of rulings in the past week as its current term winds down. By and large, the ideologically diverse panel of justices has upheld traditionally conservative ideals in its latest rulings.

Perhaps the most notable decision was Monday’s ruling in favor of the religious freedom of so-called ‘closely held’ corporations – those owned by a small group of individuals. Such businesses, the court ruled in a 5-4 vote, should not be forced to provide medicine designed to end a pregnancy in violation of the religious values of their owners.

While the decision was just the latest blow to Barack Obama’s already beleaguered healthcare law, many believers across the nation also saw it as a reinforcement of religious freedom.

Another ruling with religious undertones restored the right of pro-life advocates in Massachusetts to stand near abortion facilities in an effort to share alternatives to the deadly procedure with clients.

The court will have another opportunity to weigh in on a faith-based issue later this year, according to recent reports. Justices confirmed Tuesday that they will hear an appeal from a Gilbert, Ariz. church, which claims the city unfairly holds religious facilities to stricter advertising regulations than other organizations.

Good News Community Church contends that local houses of worship are limited to signs that are a maximum of six square feet and may only put them out within 14 hours of an advertised event. Political and other signage, however, can be much larger and remain on display for months at a time.

Two lower courts found that the town is within its rights to impose differing rules on sign placement based on the parties involved, provided the regulations are not based on the sign’s content. The church is hoping to convince the nation’s highest court to reverse those rulings.

The Supreme Court will consider the case when it reconvenes this fall.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

SCOTUS To Decide If Arizona Town Is Discriminating Against Churches

supremecourt

The U.S. Supreme Court has handed down a number of rulings in the past week as its current term winds down. By and large, the ideologically diverse panel of justices has upheld traditionally conservative ideals in its latest rulings.

Perhaps the most notable decision was Monday’s ruling in favor of the religious freedom of so-called ‘closely held’ corporations – those owned by a small group of individuals. Such businesses, the court ruled in a 5-4 vote, should not be forced to provide medicine designed to end a pregnancy in violation of the religious values of their owners.

While the decision was just the latest blow to Barack Obama’s already beleaguered healthcare law, many believers across the nation also saw it as a reinforcement of religious freedom.

Another ruling with religious undertones restored the right of pro-life advocates in Massachusetts to stand near abortion facilities in an effort to share alternatives to the deadly procedure with clients.

The court will have another opportunity to weigh in on a faith-based issue later this year, according to recent reports. Justices confirmed Tuesday that they will hear an appeal from a Gilbert, Ariz. church, which claims the city unfairly holds religious facilities to stricter advertising regulations than other organizations.

Good News Community Church contends that local houses of worship are limited to signs that are a maximum of six square feet and may only put them out within 14 hours of an advertised event. Political and other signage, however, can be much larger and remain on display for months at a time.

Two lower courts found that the town is within its rights to impose differing rules on sign placement based on the parties involved, provided the regulations are not based on the sign’s content. The church is hoping to convince the nation’s highest court to reverse those rulings.

The Supreme Court will consider the case when it reconvenes this fall.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom