The lawless #Resistance by kritarchs continues to thwart the enforcement of immigration laws. In another manufactured controversy, the Lying Press made a martyr of an illegal alien, Pablo Villavicencio, who failed to comply with a deportation order over 10 years ago and a DeepState RINO kritarch, Paul Crotty (white, 77 years old, appointed by George W. Bush) jumped at the chance to virtue signal against President Trump and immigration enforcement. Worse yet, Crotty praised the absconding illegal alien, ordered his release, and demanded that he be given the opportunity for a second chance at avoiding removal.

A judge on Tuesday ordered the immediate release of an Ecuadorean immigrant who was held for deportation after he delivered pizza to a Brooklyn Army installation.

“Although he stayed in the United States unlawfully and is currently subject to a final order of removal, he has otherwise been a model citizen,” U.S. District Judge Paul Crotty wrote of Pablo Villavicencio.

The Manhattan judge said Villavicencio, who was being held at a New Jersey lockup, can remain in the United States while he exhausts his right to try to gain legal status. Villavicencio applied to stay in the U.S. after he married a U.S. citizen, with whom he has two young girls.

[Judge: Release Immigrant Held After Army Base Pizza Delivery, by Larry Neumeister, AP/US News And World Report, July 24, 2018]

None of Kritarch Cotty’s concerns had anything to do with the law, but only with Resistance to the new immigration enforcement priorities of President Trump. Cotty apparently thinks that some illegal aliens should be let off scot free as a matter of policy. He openly attacked the Assistant U.S. Attorney defending the government and acting to uphold the law.

The judge ruled after hearing arguments earlier Tuesday, when he put a government lawyer on the spot over the effort by immigration authorities to enforce a 2010 deportation order. He questioned the need to detain and quickly deport Villavicencio, who’s 35 years old.

“Well, the powerful are doing what they want, and the poor are suffering what they must,” the judge said after hearing Assistant U.S. Attorney Joseph Cordaro defend the government’s actions.

“I mean, is there any concept of justice here or are we just doing this because we want to?” the judge asked. “Why do we want to enforce the order? It makes no difference in terms of the larger issues facing the country.”

It is certainly not within Kritarch Crotty’s mandate as a District Court Judge to question the justice of any single deportation, only to ensure that the law was followed. And Crotty could not find any part of the law violated, so he made up some fanciful excuse to stop the deportation of an illegal alien given due process almost 10 years ago, and who violated the law by failing to leave when he was ordered removed, a criminal violation of Title 8 United States Code, Section 1255, Penalties Related To Removal.

This is in contrast to another Federal Judge, one who adhered to the narrow area of authority granted by Congress to District Court Judges, and refused to interfere with the lawful deportation of another illegal alien.

A Massachusetts federal court judge ruled late Thursday that he has no jurisdiction to delay deportation proceedings of a gay Ugandan woman who has said she believes she could be persecuted, and even killed, if she returns to Uganda, where homosexuality is illegal and punishable by life in prison.

Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV said that by law, the decision of whether to stay the removal of the woman while government officials weigh her claim for asylum based on her sexuality rests with immigration authorities, not the federal district court.

[Federal Judge Denies Gay Ugandan Woman’s Plea For Release, Stay Of Removal, by Maria Cramer, Boston Globe, July 20, 2018]

Bravely, Judge Saylor stood with the Constitution, rather than his personal policy preferences, acknowledging that Congress makes immigration law and that he was bound by both the Constitution and statute. It is sad to have to say his clear recognition of the law was brave, sice 100 years ago such a case would not even have been given the courtesy of a hearing due to the obvious baseless claims by the aliens in both these stories.However, in this world we live in with a highly politicized judiciary acting as dictators, we must praise those brave enough to do what all judges would have done years ago.

“The Court is unwilling to ignore or defy the law, even in highly sympathetic circumstances,” he wrote in a 21-page ruling. “To do so would be a fundamental violation of its most basic responsibilities.”

In his decision, Saylor cited a 2005 law known as the “Real ID Act” that stripped courts of the authority to review challenges by immigrants to final orders of removal “in the plainest of language.”

Think how rare those words are by Judge Saylor in comparison to Crotty and other kritarchs who think they make immigration law and policy, not Congress and the President. We are truly moving to a dictatorship. Congress must act to reign in these kritarchs.

Interestingly, the lawyers representing the above illegal alien, which the reporter refused to name at the request of her attorneys, for no good reason as this matter is a public record, cited Kritarch Patti Saris, well known to my readers at VDare.com, a lawless kritarch routinely and unlawfully interfering with deportation orders.

Lawless because Congress prohibited most judicial review of orders of removal in the above cited Real ID Act of 2005, codified as Title 8 United States Code, Section 1252, Judicial Review of Orders of Removal.

(2) Matters not subject to judicial review
(A) Review relating to section 1225(b)(1)Notwithstanding any other provision of law (statutory or nonstatutory), including section 2241 of title 28, or any other habeas corpus provision, and sections 1361 and 1651 of such title, no court shall have jurisdiction to review—
(i) except as provided in subsection (e), any individual determination or to entertain any other cause or claim arising from or relating to the implementation or operation of an order of removal pursuant to section 1225(b)(1) of this title

This is quite clear, but also apparent is that Congress needs to act to reign in kritarchs like Crotty and Saris. Impeachment is an answer, but conviction is unlikely. Any new immigration act needs to fully remove judges from the process and authorize the President to ignore any order from a kritarch that violations an Act of Congress.