May 19, 2020 | Judicial Watch
“Yeah it may be against the law, but its important that people who aren’t supposed to be here, get the money they aren’t supposed to get, in violation of the law,” Fitton states in last week’s Weekly Update while describing the argument of the California court in the Newsom case.
Similarly to the illegal cash benefits case in California, Judicial Watch filed another case last week in Maryland’s Montgomery County, “a wealthy jurisdiction just north of Washington, DC with terrible sanctuary cities which is trying to spend money to give payments to illegal aliens,” Fitton states. Montgomery County officials, who are known to have “released rapists just to avoid telling ICE about them” are seeking to bypass Maryland laws on cash benefits. To be clear, “the law requires that if you’re giving benefits to illegal aliens, it needs to be passed by the state legislature.”
Acting unilaterally in defiance of state laws, Montgomery County is “doing it on its own,” – joining the California Governor in “abusing their powers to achieve policy objectives using the coronavirus as an excuse.” “I’m hoping the court rules in our favor, at least in part,” Fitton continues, as he reminds his viewers of the argument used by the California court against Judicial Watch’s challenge to Gov. Newsom’s illegal cash benefits program. As some might recall, the California court stated that Judicial Watch was “likely to succeed on the merits but that there was a public interest in illegal aliens getting illegal cash.” “If that’s the case,” Fitton posits, “why have law at all?”
As “the very definition of arbitrary power,” these coronavirus abuses are destroying people’s lives, and the rule of law. Arbitrarily enough, “these leftists who are violating the rule of law, talk about the 10th amendment, affirming the states have a right to spend this money to help illegal aliens stay in violation of federal law.” “Isn’t it wonderful how all these leftists become originalists?” “Of course it’s just bunk,” Fitton continues , “but it shows how weak their argument is.”