Posted on 02/04/2017 4:35:48 AM PST by NYer
Federal district Judge James Robart of Seattle ordered a complete, nationwide temporary restraining order against President Trump's temporary ban on visitors from seven Middle Eastern countries. If you read the ruling as I have, you can see this is clearly unconstitutional on its face, and constitutes a judicial coup against President Trump and the executive branch.
1) The standards for granting a temporary restraining order are quite high. The plaintiff must show that he is likely to succeed on the merits, and would suffer irreparable harm if the injunction were not granted. Here the people from the excluded countries cannot show irreparable harm, only that their entry to the United States would be delayed. And they are unlikely to succeed on the merits, because the President has no obligation to let foreigners into the country. On the contrary, there may be irreparable harm if the temporary travel ban is lifted, as terrorists may enter the country and kill people.
2) By the way, the plaintiffs here aren't even the people from the excluded countries. They are the states of Washington and Minnesota who claim their citizens would be harmed if the temporary ban were not lifted; perhaps Microsoft is being deprived of some cheap labor. It's a flimsy argument at best. This ruling has no substantial effect on states' residents, contrary to what Judge Robart has said.
3) President Trump clearly has discretion to decide who to admit to the United States and who not to, when it comes to admitting people who are not citizens. Foreigners do not enjoy the protection of our Constitution. The fact that a citizen may incidentally benefit from a foreigner coming to America doesn't mean that that citizen has standing.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
How dare trump think he could do what obama has done for 8 years
8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens
(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.
Whenever means whenever.
Any means ANY.
Bottom line: had he wanted to ban all Muslims, he could have easily done so and been well within his rights to do so.
Bottom Line George W. Bush and George HW Bush appointed horrible Judges
As did Nixon (e.g., Warren Burger, Harry Blackmun), Gerald Ford (e.g., John Paul Stevens) and Ronaldus Magnus (e.g., Sandra Day O'Connor, Anthony Kennedy).
Time to remove judge Jimmy from office for misbehavior. It would serve to nip this lawlessness in the bud.
To paraphrase another great President: the judge has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it.
How does a SEATTLE judge do anything NATIONWIDE??? Lol
Grab him as an enemy combatant and send the judge to Gitmo and waterboard him. Then ignore his ruling.
More of the stench from the bench. These little mini dictators in their blackrobes do not make laws. If they won’t enforce the law, remove them. The people have had enough of the blackrobed tyrants.
They’re trying to set him up for impeachment as soon as possible. I don’t want him falling into that trap. I think he needs to become acquainted with his veto powers. It looks like it’s time to grind things to a halt and leave them that way until we can all come to an understanding about how things are and how they’re going to be.
Re GOP appointed judges gone bad:
It’s been remarked that judges often drift progressive, but rarely drift conservative.
I think it’s something about the power of the office, and the egotistic seductiveness of being the interpreter of the law. I don’t know how that tendency can be changed.
He is a Federal District Court Judge: U.S. District Court Judge James L. Robart.
So he has the power to do what he did. But so does Trump and Trump has the law on his side. To Dem Judges the law is just swept aside for the "greater good" whenever they like.
This is “Lawfare” at work. Use our own laws to destroy us “legally.”
Federal courts have limited jurisdiction, though.
Anyway, he will be overturned on this one.
Anyone notice how liberals, though, are well-trained in using lawyers and courts to side with them?
There is no reservoir of conservative legal theory to draw on. There are no Originalista. Those called Originalists are really Textualists, such as Scalia.
Today, Originalism is history and philosophy instead of active legal theory.
Modern elastic legal theory is the only thing taught in law schools, and no one who dissents has a hope of becoming a judge.
The only hope is that Congress will more closely regulate the jurisdiction of the federal courts as per Article 3, Section 2.
Judge Robart, who was appointed by George W. Bush (should we be surprised, or not?) has clearly usurped his authority. The case clearly has no plaintiffs with standing or any kind of validity. At most Judge Robart should have stayed his decision pending appeal to circuit courts. His radical injunction smacks of a judicial coup, of a single federal district judge asserting his authority over the entire executive branch. His arguments for doing so are unconstitutional, as is his manner of issuing the order. We are living in a time when judicial Ayatollahs are usurping the power of our elected officials, and it is very much like a judicial coup.
The best answer. You win the internet for the day!
Term limits. No politician (and I include judges) should have a lifetime appointment.
yeaaa!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.