Posted on 06/27/2018 2:29:42 AM PDT by Kaslin
"The President lawfully exercised that discretion based on his findings—following a worldwide, multi-agency review—that entry of the covered aliens would be detrimental to the national interest"- U.S. Supreme Court
Liberals sued President Trump in what is now known as the Travel Ban case. The substance of the liberal allegations was that the underlying purpose of Trump's "Travel Ban" was Islamic animus - that the President’s stated concerns about vetting protocols and national security were, in fact, just a guise for discriminating against Muslims.
At the heart of the liberal case were a series of statements made by Trump and some of his Twitter retweets. Statements like “Islam hates us," and we need a "total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on," and retweets of links to three "anti-Muslim propaganda videos." And, five out of the seven banned nations have Muslim-majority populations, the liberals cried out.
But Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the Supreme Court, referred to these statements and retweets as "extrinsic evidence" and stated that the President's "policy will be upheld so long as it can reasonably be understood to result from a justification independent of unconstitutional grounds." The banned nations make up only 8% of the world's Muslim population, and the ban is limited to countries that were previously designated by Congress or prior administrations as posing national security risks, the Court observed. More importantly, the text of the ban says nothing about religion, and Justice Roberts did not see fit to read random statements on religion from the campaign and from Twitter into the ban.
Liberals sued President Trump in what is now known as the Travel Ban case. The substance of the liberal allegations was that the underlying purpose of Trump's "Travel Ban" was Islamic animus - that the President’s stated concerns about vetting protocols and national security were, in fact, just a guise for discriminating against Muslims.
At the heart of the liberal case were a series of statements made by Trump and some of his Twitter retweets. Statements like “Islam hates us," and we need a "total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on," and retweets of links to three "anti-Muslim propaganda videos." And, five out of the seven banned nations have Muslim-majority populations, the liberals cried out.
But Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the Supreme Court, referred to these statements and retweets as "extrinsic evidence" and stated that the President's "policy will be upheld so long as it can reasonably be understood to result from a justification independent of unconstitutional grounds." The banned nations make up only 8% of the world's Muslim population, and the ban is limited to countries that were previously designated by Congress or prior administrations as posing national security risks, the Court observed. More importantly, the text of the ban says nothing about religion, and Justice Roberts did not see fit to read random statements on religion from the campaign and from Twitter into the ban.
Quite simply, under U.S. law, the President may limit alien entry when he finds that their entry “would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.” 8 U. S. C. §1182(f). In this case, Trump determined that aliens from some countries are detrimental because those countries do not share adequate information with the U.S. for an informed decision on entry, and that other countries are detrimental because their aliens create national security risks. Trump explained that the limits he put in place were tailored to protect American interests. The only prerequisite set forth in §1182(f) is that the President "find" that the entry of the covered aliens would be detrimental to the interests of the U.S. "The President has undoubtedly fulfilled that requirement here," the Supreme Court ruled. He was squarely within his powers.
And as for the liberal cries of outrage and disgust? The Court shut them down. “Whether the President’s chosen method of addressing perceived risks is justified from a policy perspective is irrelevant to the scope of his [§1182(f)] authority." Then the Court cited prior travel bans, including Obama's, which also banned travel, to show congruity, to show the liberals that Obama and Trump's travel bans are ... similar.
ustice Roberts shut down the liberals yet again when he pointed out that Obama and Clinton used their travel bans to retaliate against governments they did not like, going outside their powers, not just limiting their travel bans to individuals who were detrimental to the U.S. (But of course no one cared to sue them. Liberal outrage has been limited to Trump stance du jour.)
Justice Roberts summarized and responded to the liberal argument very well:
More fundamentally, plaintiffs and the dissent challenge the entry suspension based on their perception of its effectiveness and wisdom. They suggest that the policy is overbroad and does little to serve national security interests. But we cannot substitute our own assessment for the Executive’s predictive judgments on such matters, all of which are delicate, complex, and involve large elements of prophecy.
Justice Roberts got it right. "So much winning!"
Not true, there are a strong subset of Terrorists from the left, especially all of the eco warrior and antifa idiots.
no, not all terrorists are Muslim. The communist types are still out there (in India and in the PHilippines), and many of them have links with the drug cartels (e.g. FARC in Colombia and Venezuela).
You can already see how future cases are going to go - 4 “justices” don’t want to follow the Constitution, but are easy marks to go by their “feelings”.
Everybody can now REALLY appreciate that Mitch stood firm after Scalia’s death and didn’t allow Obama to appoint a SC justice.
Similarly, Republicans MUST keep control of the Senate this fall, not only to block Dem impeachment efforts, but also because there’s probably another SC vacancy coming up
Take that you liberal loons! Good on you justice Kennedy.
Oops that should say Roberts not Kennedy.
First time I ever heard of Obama’s travel bans. Will look up.
But Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the Supreme Court, referred to these statements and retweets as “extrinsic evidence” and stated that the President’s “policy will be upheld so long as it can reasonably be understood to result from a justification independent of unconstitutional grounds.” The banned nations make up only 8% of the world’s Muslim population, and the ban is limited to countries that were previously designated by Congress or prior administrations as posing national security risks, the Court observed. More importantly, the text of the ban says nothing about religion, and Justice Roberts did not see fit to read random statements on religion from the campaign and from Twitter into the ban.
...
I can’t even imagine how deluded and politically biased the four minority justices are.
Trump was right on this from the start. Liberal $hitffaces delayed this for 1.5 years. Get on with it, and keep those bearded towelheads out!
Roberts wont regain my trust simce healthcare.... but thamks for decision..
“Roberts wont regain my trust simce healthcare.... but thamks for decision..”
What you said.
Right...especially the "muslims" from N. Korea and Venezuela. What Bullshit.
He gave us obamacare against all odds... but thanks for this decision on those nations with muslim travel to the US..
So the SCOUS “ok’s” keeping people from Muslim countries out, why are our borders not totally secured as well? Who knows where those who sneak across our borders come from? Are ONLY Hispanics crossing illegally, what about “bad people” from anywhere in the world? Our borders MUST BE SECURED, even if it takes the entire military to do so.
Really? “Shut down liberals”?
Like with an “epic rant”? BOOM.
It’s the dems and globalists who want open borders...they are hoping to delay all this until the mid terms when they think they will have the house and maybe the senate also.... then all of us will be peons for them to rule and reign over.. one big world for them to control. They do believe they can have such power.. fools. Their dream of gaining back congress, is fading.. rapidly fading away. So hey, hit them at the store, restaurant, anywhere... and they think that will gain votes????
They are aiming for 2 clalsses of people... the very rich, the power... and the rest will be the poor... goes back to times when kings ruled the major part of the European/Asian/Mediterrain and the “people” were slaves... no paycheck.. just work for the powerful government. The elite already believe we are not smart enough to run our lives.. and electing Trump convinced them they were right.. we need caretakers/masters.
Mitch McConnell saved the US from catastrophe.
A masterpiece of dry jurisprudential opinionating, there.
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.