The doj coordinated with Texas Ag to kill Texas Dream Act, says Trump manager

Washington – A senior official from the Ministry of Justice boasted during a private republican rally that the Trump administration was able to kill a Texas law which gave undocumented immigrants in the tuition fees “in six hours” by coordinating with the Attorney General of Texas Ken Paxton, according to a registration obtained by NBC News.

On June 4, the Ministry of Justice Suite of Texas on Texas Dream Act, then quickly deposited a Joint movement with Texas Ask a judge to declare unconstitutional law and to definitively prohibit Texas from enforcing the law. The same day, The judge did.

External organizations sought to invalidate the decision on Tuesday, arguing that the Ministry of Justice and the Paxton Office “were complicated to ensure an agreed injunction” and were committed to an inadequacy “legal choreography“To obtain the desired result.

Speaking to the Republican Procureneys General Association one day after the rapid victory, the deputy prosecutor Abhishek Kambli seemed to confirm it.

“So yesterday we filed a complaint against Texas, had a consent decree on the same day, or a consent judgment, and it was granted a few hours later,” Kambli told participants, according to the audio obtained by NBC News. “And what he did is that we were able to have this communication line and speak in advance, a law that has been a problem for the state for 24 years, we got rid of it in six hours.”

Kambli, who previously worked for the Kansas Attorney General, Kris Kobach, added that the Ministry of Justice has “good relations” with the State Attorney General, which allows him to “move things up”.

Kambli also said that the second Trump administration “learns to be offensive”, according to audio.

“I think it was the biggest criticism the first time in the first Trump administration – there were many missed opportunities to exercise the power of the federal government for the things we appreciate that never happened,” said Kambli. “But this time, we brought a lot of people from the world of the State who made this kind of dispute, know how to do it and do it.”

Paxton’s office did not respond to a request for comments.

A spokesperson for the Ministry of Justice did not dispute that Kambli made these statements and said that he was “standard enough” for lawyers of the Ministry of Justice to inform prosecutors of the state of federal proceedings in advance. He cited a policy of the Ministry of Justice according to which the provision of a fair warning to the prosecutors general of the State before depositing prosecution could “Resolve questions before dispute. “”

The Ministry of Justice filed the trial before the American district judge Reed O’Connor, a candidate of George W. Bush in the Wichita Falls division in the Northern Texas District, of which the court has become a destination for justiciable conservatives requesting favorable results.

The Democracy Forward groups, the ACLU Foundation of Texas and the National Immigration Law Center submitted a request on Tuesday on behalf of the Unión Del Pueblo Entero, a union founded by César Chávez. They argued that the event sequence “obliges a conclusion: the United States and the Attorney General of Texas are collus to predetermine the outcome of the case.”

The movement added: “The founders did not conceive our contradictory system for the shadow between the co -parties. The system requires the opposition, the argument and the deliberation – and not the consent of the decrees to pretend to be a dispute.”

Skye Perryman, president and chief executive officer of democracy, criticized Paxton for not having defended the Bipartisan Texas Dream Act, which the Legislative Assembly adopted and Governor Rick Perry signed more than two decades. She noted that the Legislative Assembly had refused to repeal the law.

Paxton recently announced that he was going to challenge the American senator John Cornyn in the republican primary next year-a battle of the GOP-Versus-Gop Between two men who have been fighting for years And in the running for the attention of President Donald Trump.

“Instead of defending the law of Texas … The Attorney General Paxton experienced a collus with the Trump-Vance administration to try to eliminate the law before the courts,” said Perryman in a statement. “This maneuver is improper use of the courts. If the Attorney General Paxton does not defend Texans, we will. We are committed to ensuring that this cynical decision is opposed, to the defense of the Texas Dream Act and to support the courage of our customers. ”

Carl Tobias of the School of Law from the University of Richmond said that the heads of the Texas Chamber and the Senate should be concerned that the Paxton office refuses to defend a state law.

“The whole American premise to settle a case is that you have people who have contradictory interests and that is why they are in court to start,” said Tobias. “But of course, we know for political reasons, this is probably not the case.”

Saikrishna Prakash from the Law School of the University of Virginia, which has has sought the obligation of the prosecutors of the State to defend The laws in the 50 states said that more lawyers were willing to say that laws are unconstitutional.

“Part of the reason they are more willing to do is a political reason, whether they want to be a senator or governor,” he said.

Prakash said that in republican and democratic presidential administrations, there was recently a tendency to settle when a litigant takes a position that the administration supports. Administrations also wish colonies which will link the next president to the policies that their parties argued.

“In my mind, it is not a good way to direct a railroad, whether it is done by Biden or by Trump,” said Prakash.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration is continuing more states on tuition fees for undocumented students. The Ministry of Justice continued the Kentucky last week On his policy to issue tuition fees in undocumented migrants. The Ministry of Justice Wednesday continued the state of Minnesota On his law doing the same.

In both cases, the Ministry of Justice highlighted the result in the Texas case as a justification.