Trump's AG, Jeff Sessions, is continuing the administration's policy of bashing judges who show even an ounce of sympathy or compassion for immigrants by calling out a Brooklyn federal District Court Judge, Nicholas Garaufis, as "offensive" for stating that Trump's DACA cancellation was "heartless".

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/1...olicies-244208

According to the above POLiTICO report, Sessions made the following statement in a speech at the right wing Heritage Foundation:

"...the court said the government 'can't come into court to espouse a position that is "heartless"'. He didn't say it was unlawful. He said, 'I don't like your policy.'...A judge's comments on policy like this is [sic] offensive, and it's disrespectful of the legislative and executive branches [i.e. Donald Trump]...The Constitution gives judges no right to veto a president's actions because they disagree on policy grounds."

It is certainly true enough that judges have no right to "veto" a legislative or executive action because of a disagreement over policy (even though, as POLITICO also points out, that is, very arguably, exactly what Texas federal District Judge Andrew Hanen did when he struck down President Obama's DAPA/DACA Extension initiative).

But don't judges have the power to make findings of fact in a litigation? And, as a finding of fact, if not as a conclusion of law, was Judge Garaufis anything other than deadly accurate and on target when he called Trump's DACA cancellation "heartless"?

Roger Algase
Attorney at Law
algaselex@gmail.com