Facts don’t matter when they are in opposition to what is trying to be achieved.
“[The court] examined official statements from Trump and other executive branch officials, along with the proclamation itself, and found it “unconstitutionally tainted with animus toward Islam.” Interesting new legal standard ... Apparently Ruthie Ginsberg should be recused from hearing this case because of her past public animus / statements against Trump personally. In fact, let’s extend this legal standard a bit further . . . since the 4th Circuit has ruling can be interpreted as nothing more than a personal animus against Trump and they are barred from hearing any future cases involving Trump directly or tangentially.
[[
“[The court] examined official statements from Trump and other executive branch officials, along with the proclamation itself, and found it “unconstitutionally tainted with animus toward Islam.” Interesting new legal standard ... Apparently Ruthie Ginsberg should be recused from hearing this case because of her past public animus / statements against Trump personally. In fact, let’s extend this legal standard a bit further . . . since the 4th Circuit has ruling can be interpreted as nothing more than a personal animus against Trump and they are barred from hearing any future cases involving Trump directly or tangentially.]]
Precisely-