Friday, August 15, 2014

Iranian Immigration Judge In Hot Water

A. Ashley Tabaddor, one of the kritarch triumvirate, has pushed the limits of legal ethics, even for the Holder Justice Department.  Tabaddor has been ordered by the Executive Officer for Immigration Review (EOIR) to recuse herself in all cases before her involving Iranian nationals.  This is no surprise, as "ethnic" immigration judges have a collective horrible reputation for dispensing favoritism to their co-ethnics throughout the immigration system.

Public Affairs Alliance of Iranian Americans August 12, 2014
Judge Ashley Tabaddor Files Suit against Department of Justice for Violating First Amendment and Civil Rights Act of 1964
August 12, 2014, Los Angeles, CA –  The Public Affairs Alliance of Iranian Americans (PAAIA) was today informed of a suit filed against the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) by Judge Ashley Tabaddor, an immigration judge for the U.S. Immigration Court. In this suit, Judge Tabaddor challenges an order that indefinitely recuses her from hearing cases involving Iranian nationals, citing that the order violates her First Amendment rights of free speech and association. The suit also notes that the order is racially discriminatory under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  

Interesting that Tabaddor claims racial discrimination as the basis for her lawsuit; is she claiming she is white and was discriminated against, or is she some new unknown race that Middle Easterners like herself want to be?  She has shrilly claimed to not be white, despite the legal definition of Persians, among others, as white by the U.S. Census.

The PAAIA appears to be a front for the Shi'ite dictatorship in Iran, harping in a Soviet manner about "friendship" between nations.

The lessons derived from the Cold War propose that more assets should be dedicated to cultural and educational exchanges. Such exchanges with Iran will uphold positive features of American society and help cultivate the good will of the Iranian people towards America.
The Iranian American community is in a unique position to help the citizens of Iran and the United States constructively engage with each other. PAAIA’s annual surveys have shown that U.S.-Iran relations are the single most important issue on the minds of Iranian Americans, and that many frequently travel to Iran and/or have relatives still living there. Furthermore, the evolving political climate in Iran, if it continues on its current path, puts the Iranian American diaspora in a much better position than in any prior period since 1979 to help the citizens of Iran and the United States constructively engage with each other. 

However, the PAAIA lets slip that Tabaddor considers herself a "leader" in the Iranian community.

The suit, Tabaddor v. Holder et al., charges that the DOJ based its disqualification order on racially-motivated and discriminatory criteria, specifically Judge Tabaddor’s Iranian heritage and her leadership role within the Iranian American community.

Well, if she is a leader of an ethnic or national group, then legal ethics prescribe that she recuse herself to avoid the appearance of impartiality, a serious ethical issue for both real judges and the pseudo-judges of the EOIR.  One cannot both be a leader in a particular ethnic community and claim that leadership has no appearance of a lack of impartiality.  It is clear that Tabaddor considers herself an Iranian first, as Iranian-ness appears to be her major concern in public life.

In desperation, Tabaddor and her Iranian attorney, Ali M. M. Mojdehi,  created a new race for the law suit:

18. Judge Tabaddor is Iranian-American. Her race is Near East Asian, Middle Eastern and Persian. Judge Tabaddor is culturally Muslim. 

Even more interesting is that she is "culturally" a Muslim.  The 1964 Civil Rights Act does not protect cultures, as it does race or religion.  And it is clear that Islam is not that important for Tabaddor, as she does not claim to practice the Muslim religion.  This lack of religious practice is probably the reason that the lawsuit does not identify any particular evidence that she was discriminated against by race or religion, even though the lawsuit claims discrimination based on three factors:

52. Judge Tabaddor’s nationality, race, and/or religion and association with the same, were the sole and/or motivating reasons for the recusal order. 

Note the "and/or." apparently her crackerjack attorneys can't decide which of the three was the reason for the alleged recusal order.  Occam's Razor then leads us to the obvious, it is the appearance of a lack of impartiality that motivated the recusal order.

Which brings us to the obvious, immigrants in the United States have not been acculturated and have an obvious dual loyalty.  In this case, the dual loyalty is treasonous in that Iran has been waging war on the United States since 1979.

The solution, beside denaturalization and deportation of Tabaddor, is the first step, impeachment.

Tabaddor is the face of dual loyalty.  As Holy Scripture teaches, one cannot serve two masters.  From Matthew 6:24, Douay-Rheims:

No man can serve two masters. For either he will hate the one, and love the other: or he will sustain the one, and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon. 

Tabaddor cannot both serve the Iranian community as a leader and the American people  as an immigration judge who is tasked with ordering the deportation of Iranians.

The big hint here is that the PAAIA refers to her as Judge Ashley Tabaddor, while in the lawsuit, she is required by law to user her full name, Afsaneh Ashley Tabaddor.  Clearly she is trying to downplay her Persian identity before the American people, but gets caught up by her lawsuit.

Impeachment is the answer to many problems derived from lawless Presidents to disloyal kritarchs.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

the more interesting and perhaps the real reason behind the order of recusal in 2012 was judge Tabaddors role and relationship through her advisory role of various Iranian American so-called non profit organizations which openly advocate and lobby for the Islamic regime. Her association with folks like Trita Parsi of NIAC, a self proclaimed lobist of the Islamic regime, and her speaches in those forums opining on non legal but policy positions on international issues spaecially related to US/Iran relationship. Questionable organizations like IABA, NIAC and PAIAA. Interstingly, her so-called attorney, Mojdehi, is a bankruptcy attorney who has never filed a similar type suit and also serves on the board of directors of one of those organizations. Questionable relationships with controvertial organizations is the "appearance of" which she appears to be clueless about. Also interesting, she is coming out to be the hero in the Iranian American community since no one has talked about the reason why an order was issued in the first place yet the only thing talked about is her law suit! we shall see how DOJ deals with disposing of the complaint, doubtful an answer would be filed to put allegations at issue, likely a dipositive attack would first attempt to do away with the complaint which includes many procedural difficiencies on its face.