Good. Later. Reissue the order reworded. Alan Dersowich said to redo the order.
The hearing for the restraining order should ONLY have been about the merits of issuing a restraining order, NOT the merits of the EO. And there was NO merit to issuing the restraining order because the plaintiffs could hardly prove standing and didn’t at all prove irreparable harm. Talk about a circus featuring kangaroos in the court. The whole thing is wrong.
The big issue here is the Constitution mandates the feds prevent invasion (Art IV, Sec 4) and that mandate trumps a restraining order, regardless of its validity.
Trump should cite the constitutional mandate (and the errors in this proceeding) in a notification that he will proceed with the EO pursuant to Constitutional law and federal statute.
The statute on which Trump based his EO, U.S. Code Title 8, Chapter 12, appears to be contradictory. The clause from which Trump derives his EO, U.S.C. 1182(f)), appears to contradict another clause, U.S.C. 1152 (a)(1)(a) which is an anti-discrimination clause and being used in these challenges.
Not sure how Trump’s writing a new EO will get around this anti-discrimination clause. The DOJ argued very well that the anti-discrimination 1152 (a)(1)(a) clause should not apply to 1182(f) authorizing the President to act at his discretion. The fact is the hearing should never have been about the merits of the EO only the merits of a restraining order which did not appear to have merit. No matter. The Leftist judges ruled basically as they damn well pleased regardless of their legitimate limitations.
Sooner or later, we must confront the massive, ongoing constitutional crisis in the federal courts which long ago went way off the constitutional rails and are basically in free-form with no apparent limitations. IMO, Trump should throw down the gauntlet here and now: call their bluff by notifying the reasons Trump is constitutionally mandated to take this action pursuant to Art VI, Sec 4 and why the courts have not shown a valid constitutionally-based reason for preventing his immigration EO.
Then proceed declaring the court’s ruling null and void. One branch, the executive, notifying the other, the judicial, with a constitutionally-based explanation why the judicial action is unconstitutional and thus null and void maybe giving the judicial branch time to correct their error with a time set where the executive branch will proceed if the error isn’t corrected. Maybe NOW is the time for this.
The judges are guilty of judicial overreach and violated the US Constitution, for which they took an oath. Congress can impeach them.
Judicial partisanship won’t stop unless we make Congress stop them.
I would issue 7 EO’s - one for each country. Also order addition amounts of documentation for visas to be granted. And every time there is a lawsuit against it, add another country to the list.
Trump is creating a whole different battle space, then will release the Kraken
See tagline. And to hell with the courts.
Jail the judges for judicial over reach. Make it a national security issue and send them to Guantanamo.
What a misleading headline! Has to be on purpose.
Time to ball up President Trump and play 'em as you hold 'em.
We are with you on this one and will go the mile with you
The gate has been open a week now and over 10,000 VISA holders have entered our shores.
President Trump jumped the gun and failed, made one deal too many or was not prepared and hopefully learned a lesson that these liberal and RINO bastards are out to get him and this chess game is for AMERICA.
Won’t do any good. At best a 4-4 tie right now. If Kennedy sides with the communists/socialists/homos/liberals of the Less Than Supreme Court. I would not be surprised if he did side with them.
This will not be forgotten come next election time. President Trump will be able to say this congressman/woman was fighting with/against me to stand up to these judges to keep you and your family safe, to keep the nation secure.
The next islamic terror attack is on the judiciary branch they wanted to make laws and enforce policy well here is the blow back on the flip side
1) The 9th circuit thinks all travelers, not just green card holders, should get recourse, like a trial before being rejected.
2) They are arguing it is a Muslim ban, without really clearly indicating how that is the case?
Just Establish a higher Court than the 9th. The Constitution says the Government can establish courts. Nuke the Filibuster today, Establish a new court tomorrow and appeal to the hand picked Conservative America Loving Judges.