Judge Robart Was, and Is, Wrong About U.S. Refugee Arrests From Countries Within Trump Visa Ban…

He is scary...Bush appointed and helps illegals for free...

But the DOJ should have been better prepared for this Judge...something I think President Trump should have a look at...

And thank you for reading it... ;0)

When filling a seat, looks like any warm bottom will do. This judge has credentials equal to those of Sotomayor.

What does that say about both sides of the aisle? Why do we find liberals always seem to appoint those they want and Conservatives appoint those same type persons ...not that they truly believe these ‘folks’ would be of any help. We get the short end of the staff - again.

I just wish they would have waited for Sessions to be confirmed before they implemented this.

The timing on this stinks. This delay in confirmations is causing chaos.

You are welcome :)

Up the ladder is the Supreme Court
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am sure the Wise Latina will get it right.

DOJ going before a leftist Judge didn’t prepare very well. I wonder in the appeal from DOJ if they managed to find the names you did.

I agree. I bet the Dems fed the Judge the DOJ case beforehand and therefore was totally prepared to ask questions he knew the DOJ attorney didn’t know or wasn’t in the brief.

Perhaps the (DOJ) rep purposely unprepared in order to sink the EO. Lot of hold-overs in DOJ from Obama.

“I just wish they would have waited for Sessions to be confirmed before they implemented this.”

After Lisa Murkiowski and Susan Collins announced they wouldn’t vote for DeVos, the vote for DeVos became 50-50, meaning she can still be confirmed with Pence voting for her as a tie breaker.

However, one of the 50 for DeVos is Sessions. If he was confirmed before her, DeVos would go down 49-50. Thus, the confirmation vote on Sessions has been delayed to allow him to vote for DeVos.

Good grief, so many distracted with name spelling when the real story is the excellent research and fact finding by Sundance.

This compilation of arrests is a slap to this so-called judge and is such an embarrassment to the profession of a federal judge that it puts President Trump’s choice of labeling Robart as a “so-called judge” in the gracious category.

I had my doubts as well after scanning over the court transcript that was attached to the DOJ motion filed in the 9th Circuit. I zeroed in on Robart’s exclamation that there were no arrests from any of the countries on the ban list and thought that odd. I thought perhaps Robart’s clerk had researched NCIC FBI Info Systems to find no such arrests but Sundance’s work throws Robart’s credibility in the trash.

The reason Robart looks so stupid and unprofessional now is because his flawed research did not do a proper and thorough accounting that would support his saying what he said in court. Lacking jurisdiction and infringing on the Executive Branch is cause for Robart to be ridiculed and reviewed for impeachment but making statements in court with such shoddy investigation support provides prima facie evidence as to why such questions reside in the Executive Branch, to begin with. This so-called judge was asked to decide on an emergency motion to restrict the Executive Branch from carrying out its role in international affairs and in his ruling to restrict, this so-called judge decides the list of countries temporarily banned are benign and harmless based on what? 30 minutes of looking at an FBI database? 45 minutes? And that’s assuming a query of an FBI database was made.

If the FBI database was queried, it was a shoddy job. That is why time needs to be carefully spent in formulating the queries so as to be thorough in using the results to draw a conclusion.

Sundance lists many people that were not born in the 7 countries listed for the travel ban, so it would appear on the surface that Robart is correct, but he’s not correct, In fact, he’s not only a dunce, he’s dangerous to every human being in the United States because he fails to see the complete picture and failing that, he puts at risk the life of every American.

Sundance starts off with a Somali refugee who was never arrested because he was shot dead while attempting a mass murder. Did so-called Judge Robart bother to check if there were any deaths or violent life-threatening assaults by Somalis in the US? NO!

Sundance goes on to list dozens more who were refugees of one of the banned countries but who became US citizens or got green cards to become US persons. Did Robart bother to query US persons arrested who were naturalized or permanent residents originating from the banned countries? NO!

The so-called judge does not know how to query a database let alone how to conduct thorough conclusive research nor how to sense the time it would take to carry out such research, and that’s not even addressing whether he has jurisdiction, to begin with! This so-called judge is an embarrassment to his profession!

A good judge would have quickly realized all these issues and either decline to hear, rule that the court did not have jurisdiction, or at the least refused to grant based on the time to ascertain facts connected with claims presented. Instead, this so-called judge proceeded to act as if he knew things that DHS did not as in second-guessing on issues of national security!

Sundance calls out other cases that require more clever formulation of a query such as an arrest of a person from Bosnia and another from Kenya, later obtaining green cards and citizenship yet traveled to train with Al Queda terrorists in Sudan. These would be US persons on the periphery of terror who cavort with terrorists in the countries of the temporary travel ban. Yet this so-called judge would have people believe that the issue is whether any person was arrested who was directly from one of such banned countries and then, using a feeble research result of no arrests, proceeds to condemn the President of the United States by accusing him of discrimination!

Words cannot express the utter unprofessionalism and deficiency of this so-called judge.

I will give some insight as to why such people are able to ascend to a federal judgeship. First of all, note that there is a recognition of prestige given to certain federal courts. For example, a federal judgeship on the DC Court of Appeals is recognized as a prestigious appointment, or at least it has been in history. Secondly, there exist lawyers who are driven to genuinely and sincerely serve the federal judiciary. Some of these come from generations of families of lawyers with a long line of judges so it becomes a family tradition.

But in my experience, with one of my lawyers who was particularly noble, incredibly smart, experienced and quick in thinking on his feet in court, I asked him why he did not become a judge because after seeing judges who should not be judges, after seeing the damage that pro-tem judges could create (and some pro-tems were quite good also), I told him the profession needed better judges, so why not help the profession and become a judge. His answer? MONEY!

No, he was not greedy, he was expensive but he was not driven by greed. He was driven by his self-respect and self-image among his colleagues. He loved being a lawyer. But this self-image blocked him from joining the ranks of judges who were a ‘step-down’. Many of you will agree it is difficult to play a sport with people that are several notches of talent below you and who are empowered to rule over you.

But judgeships don’t pay all that well in comparison to what it is possible to earn in the private sector.

The problem is that many lawyers have trouble being lawyers, making it as a lawyer, garnering respect as lawyers, so they become judges. It’s true, some of the failing dunce lawyers become judges or sign up for paid pro-tem assignments.

The lower pay and lower standards cause in spotty fashion for lesser talented lawyers to gravitate towards available judgeships.

It’s the same in academia, the best scientists and professors stay in the lab and in the seminar rooms while those that can’t quite cut it become Deans or Associate Deans, and so on in other professions as well.

Now, this is insight that exposes embarrassing realities about professions. And that is why it is not often discussed, especially when there exist truly exemplary professionals who are driven by a sense of self-respect and service to the profession. We do not want to castigate a whole profession and cause a lack of respect for those that society needs and needs badly.

Case in point: Judge Neil Gorsuch.

What did the President say when introducing Judge Gorsuch?

He said, and it’s absolutely true, that Judge Gorsuch could have worked at any prestigious law firm of his choosing and made any amount of money, millions per year, but he chose to serve his profession. This a rare bird indeed!

The same can be said of President Trump who took a step down to serve his country. This is why President Trump appreciates all who serve their country faithfully to their best of his or her ability. It’s a commitment to serve and meet profesional standards.

But this so-called judge has tarnished his profession and caused it to be ridiculed and damaged. It is damaged because it will be now even more difficult to entice really good lawyers to use their stellar talents in making a career in the federal judiciary.

What can be done?

AVVO (https://www.avvo.com) is a help to rate lawyers. The ‘market’ will eventually sort the good ones from the not-so-good ones.

But for judges? Well, there are groups who are actively looking at how to rate judges (https://www.reddit.com/r/SeattleWA/comments/59wcqm/site_for_judge_reviews) and they correctly point out some of the pitfalls of rating judges such as 80% to 90% of elected judges run unopposed.

What about federal judges? Well, they are appointed, not elected and those on the circuit travel between states so making their office an elected office does not apply and besides there is the notion of an independent judiciary which is a valuable principle in theory.

The only idea I can come up with is a layered system of renewals and reviews conducted by an elected body. To put it in perspective, Robart should not be a judge or at least he should feel the heat in some fashion that will compel him to do a better job and to reign in his Napoleonic complex.

I don’t see impeachment as practical because there is the existence of collegiality that drives judges to have each others back and there is no mechanism for carrying out an effective impeachment process.

I’ll wait to see the notorious 9th do their notorious deed on this case, and given this so-called judge is so far out of bounds, it might not be so surprising to see the 9th stay this so-called judge’s egregious order.

Outstanding reply!!! That explains the ‘whole’ of why this Judge should be removed!!! Thank you for seeing what I did when I read the article...