Late Monday night, U.S. District Judge Andrew Hansen issued a preliminary injunction on every aspect of Obama’s November 20, 2014 executive amnesty pending the outcome of the lawsuit brought by 26 states against the Department of Homeland Security. This ruling makes the decision of Senate Democrats to filibuster a clean funding bill – one that funds all lawful aspects of the department – even more indefensible. Republicans should now go for the kill.

The ruling itself was not on the underlying merits of the case, rather on the need to grant temporary relief in the likelihood that the states win the case. As Judge Hansen noted, by not granting an injunction, states would “suffer irreparable harm” because “once these services are provided, there will be no effective way of putting the toothpaste back in the tube should Plaintiffs ultimately prevail on the merits.”

However, in addition to the injunction, there are two noteworthy points in this 123-page decision. First, Hansen clearly believes states have standing and sufficient grievances to sue the federal government over executive amnesty, unlike previous judges who have held that state grievances are “speculative.” Second, it’s quite obvious Hansen believes the states will indeed prevail on the merits.

Before granting the injunction, Judge Hansen launches into an extended deconstruction of all the arguments made by the administration and makes it clear they have no authority to pass their own statutes. (Read more about the attempt to defend illegal amnesty HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.