Former judge Stephen L. Landon Jr. has taken aim at President-elect Donald Trump and the inauguration, saying he may be forced to intervene if he is unable to hold a hearing on the president’s proposed executive order to build a wall along the Mexican border.
Landon said he would be willing to help his family if the president-elect decides to issue a second executive order that would expand his authority in a way that conflicts with the Constitution, and he’s not ruling out an attempt to intervene on his own.
Lenton, who previously served as a judge on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, said the executive order Trump issued on Jan. 20 will create a new category of illegal aliens under the Immigration and Nationality Act that would allow the president to withhold federal funds from entities that do business with the order, which Landon said would give the president an unprecedented power to enforce the law.
The executive order could also make it difficult for states to comply with the law and prevent the construction of a wall, Landon argued in a blog post on Wednesday.
“The president-Elect is taking steps that could be used by his Administration to deny federal funds to state and local governments that enforce immigration laws and enforce the nation’s laws, as well as individuals who seek asylum in the U .
S.,” Landon wrote.
“I will do whatever I can to defend the Constitution and the rule of law against the president and his Administration.”
Landon, who served on the Eastern Regional District Court of the Eastern Division of New Jersey, has previously sided with the Obama administration in its fight against Trump.
In August 2016, he sided with Trump in his unsuccessful bid to block a Trump-funded border wall.
In his blog post, Lenton also called out the Trump administration’s plan to implement a temporary halt on federal grant money to localities that enforce federal immigration laws.
“It is unclear what, if any, effect the temporary halt will have on federal funding to local governments,” Landon contended.
“It is not clear whether local governments would be able to maintain their existing programs or whether they would be forced, by the order’s implementation, to make changes that would render the grants moot.”
The executive order, titled “Enhancing Public Safety and Homeland Security,” would block the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from using money from its discretionary funds to “provide funding for any program that is directly or indirectly funded by the Department” that “engages in, directly or through its contractors, enforcement of immigration laws or other actions that restrict or restrict the exercise of the constitutional rights of U.s. citizens, lawful permanent residents, aliens here lawfully present in the United States, or other aliens.”
The order states that the federal government “does not, shall not, nor will it support or endorse any entity that engages in any activity that impedes or disrupts the lawful exercise of any of the rights secured by the Constitution.”