It seems there is no end to just how far Hillary Clinton’s tentacles reach. Her sycophants and ‘yes men’ seem to have infiltrated the furthest reaches of the country and beyond and the stench of their corruption follows them. That corrupt stench led the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) to lodge an official complaint against an immigration judge based in Southern California for choosing to use the bench as a political platform to campaign for Clinton.
The OSC announced in a statement “it has filed a complaint with the Merit Systems Protection Board requesting disciplinary action against Carmene “Zsa Zsa” DePaolo, an immigration judge employed by the U.S. Department of Justice.
In the complaint, OSC alleges that DePaolo violated the Hatch Act when she promoted then-Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s plan for immigration reform during a deportation hearing over which DePaolo was presiding in March 2016.”
In recent years and even more so since President Donald Trump took office activist judges with a significant case of “black robe fever” have allowed their personal politics to play out in courtrooms across the nation.
Thide behind their gavels using their position to undermine the Constitution, legislating from the bench rather than enforcing the rule of law. President Trump has repeatedly complained about activist immigration judges and the variety of problems they present in his attempts to secure the nation’s borders. This disciplinary action now being pursued against DePaolo is further proof his complaints have merit.
OSC revealed in the filing with the Merit Systems Protection Board, DePaolo is being referred for disciplinary action for saying, during an open deportation hearing, that the threat of a 10-year ban on re-entry for an undocumented person was “a pretty harsh thing” that then-Democratic presidential candidate Clinton was planning to change.
DePaolo went on to explain her position from the bench stating the policy would be altered provided that “the Senate becomes a Democratic body and there’s some hope that they can actually pass immigration legislation,” She then went on to criticize the Republicans, stating they by contrast, “aren’t going to do anything” about immigration “if they can help it,” other than to “try to deport everybody,” according to the OSC’s account.
During the hearing in question, DePaolo allegedly called the defendant’s potential 10-year ban on re-entry into the U.S. a ‘pretty harsh thing’ that Clinton would change if she won the presidency and the Senate flipped to Democratic control, according to the special counsel complaint.
According to Special Counsel Henry J. Kerner, DePaolo’s comments amounted to advocating for a particular party and candidate while in a federal workplace, which is a direct violation of the Hatch Act. Kerner said in a public statement on Wednesday – “When a federal immigration judge in a public setting uses her position to advocate for partisan campaign outcomes, that’s a real problem. Judge DePaolo appears to be in clear violation of the Hatch Act and we believe she should face significant disciplinary action.”
One of about 330 immigration judges across the country, DePaolo handles deportation and asylum cases. These cases have become a major focus as the immigration debate comes to the forefront of public attention in part to leftist progressives and open borders proponents demand an end to the Trump administration’s current “zero tolerance” policies at the border.
Depending on the outcome of the disciplinary action, a Hatch Act violation can result in a wide range of penalties, up to and including demotion, suspension, removal from employment or even debarment.
The special counsel’s action comes just days after President Donald Trump publically blasted the immigration court system for prolonging the deportation of illegal aliens caught at the U.S. – Mexico border. Rather than holding lengthy immigration hearings, the system should swiftly detain and return anyone caught crossing the border illegally, Trump argued.
“It’s so simple. It’s called, ‘I’m sorry, you can’t come in. You have to go in through a legal process,’” he said at a meeting with lawmakers on Tuesday, according to The Wall Street Journal.
Judge DePaolo has been on the immigration bench since 1995 and she drew previously drew a significant amount of negative attention for her decision to release an illegal alien without bond.
The illegal alien was arrested on a street corner in front of her children on suspicion of belonging to a human trafficking ring. The arrest sparked protests from pro-immigrant rights groups with claims that it was harsh, though it seems nothing was said about her potential trafficking victims.
Clearly, it is naive to believe that judges do not hold personal views. They naturally have opinions on political matters and current events, as well as a preferred candidate they choose to support.
However, given their position to effectuate change in the lives of Americans, as well as affect the fate of the country as a whole, judges are expected to put their personal bias aside. That is the job they are either elected or appointed to do, the job they take an oath to do to the best of their ability, and they are held to a very high standard.
Yet, judges such as DePaolo make a mockery of their position when they publically spout partisan political leanings in open court with obviously inaccurate statements. A judge that cannot set their personal feelings for a political party aside while sitting on the bench does not deserve to be there.
Note From the Editor: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of this website or of the owners/administrators of where this article is shared online. Claims made in this piece are based on the author’s own opinion and not stated as evidence or fact.