Free Republic

Democratic attorneys general in four states announced Thursday that they will try to block the Trump administration's revised executive order on travel in court, pushing for the temporary restraining order that halted the first order to remain intact. In early February, U.S. District Judge James Robart issued an order blocking the first version of the ban, which applied visitors from seven Muslim-majority countries and all immigrants. Robart’s ruling was upheld by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, leading the Trump administration to issue the new order on Monday. Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson (D) said Thursday his office will...

The State Department has more than doubled the rate of refugees from Iraq, Syria and other suspect countries in the week since a federal judge’s reprieve, in what analysts said appears to be a push to admit as many people as possible before another court puts the program back on ice. A staggering 77 percent of the 1,100 refugees let in since Judge James L. Robart’s Feb. 3 order have been from the seven suspect countries. Nearly a third are from Syria alone — a country that Mr. Trump has ordered be banned altogether from the refugee program. Another 21...

A federal appeals court in San Francisco ruled to not reinstate President Donald Trump's ban on travelers from seven predominantly Muslim nations. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals argued the government, including Trump's White House, did not show it was likely to win an appeal and also articulated that the state of Washington had standing because its state universities suffered harm from the executive order. The appeals court was looking at a lower-court ruling that suspended the ban and allowed previously barred travelers to enter the U.S. An appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court is possible. U.S. District Judge...

What is done is done, and there can be no going back. I do want to go over some points that are outstanding in President Trump’s “immigration ban.” Number one is that President Trump had the right to issue and Executive Order on National Security without being questioned. No other President in history has been treated as unfairly as Donald Trump. Number two Donald Trump had every right to criticize liberal Judge Robart, who used his power of the law to kill President Trump’s power of the law in placing an Executive Order to protect National Security. President Trump’s power...

Let’s look at sections of the Opinion Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for Arizona v. United States 567 U.S. ___ (2012)The Government of the United States has broad, undoubted power over the subject of immigration and the status of aliens. See Toll v. Moreno, 458 U. S. 1, 10 (1982) ; see generally S. Legomsky & C. Rodríguez, Immigration and Refugee Law and Policy 115–132 (5th ed. 2009). This authority rests, in part, on the National Government’s constitutional power to “establish an uniform Rule of Nat- uralization,” U. S. Const., Art. I, §8, cl. 4, and its inher- ent power as...

As judges on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals weigh the legality of President Trump’s immigration executive order, a Republican push to split up the controversial court -- and shrink its clout -- is gaining steam on Capitol Hill. Republican Sens. Jeff Flake and John McCain of Arizona introduced legislation last month to carve six states out of the San Francisco-based court circuit and create a brand new 12th Circuit. They argue that the 9th is too big, too liberal and too slow resolving cases. If they succeed, only California, Oregon, Hawaii and two island districts would remain in the...

ANNCOULTER.COM If only we were able to deport citizens, we could use Trump's new policy of excluding those who are "hostile" toward our country to get rid of Judge James Robart. Judge Robart's veto of Trump's travel ban notwithstanding, there is not the slightest question but that the president, in his sole discretion, can choose to admit or exclude any foreigners he likes, based on "the interests of the United States.” The Clinton administration used the executive branch's broad power over immigration to send a 6-year-old boy back to a communist dictatorship. The courts were completely powerless to stop him....

If you want to see the difference between a federal judge who follows the rule of law and a federal judge who ignores laws he doesn’t like in order to reach a preferred public policy outcome, just compare the two district court decisions issued in Washington state and Massachusetts over President Donald Trump’s immigration executive order.Contrary to the “travel ban” label, the executive order temporarily suspended the granting of visas from seven failed and failing countries that are supplying many of the terrorists plaguing the world.Despite what Judge James Robart of the Western District of Washington says, Trump acted fully...

As our Monday editorial details, there is every reason to believe that the eventual ruling of the Ninth Circuit federal appeals court will control the outcome of litigation over President Trump’s temporary travel ban on both aliens from seven countries and refugees. A three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit is considering the Justice Department’s appeal of a temporary restraining order issued by Seattle federal district judge James Robart, which suspends the ban. The panel has announced that it will hear oral argument on Tuesday. The Ninth Circuit’s determination is likely to be dispositive because there are currently only eight justices...

Last week Seattle Judge Robart claimed no-one had been arrested from the seven nations that are included in President Trump’s executive order. From the hearing: • Judge Robart: “How many arrests have there been of foreign nationals for those seven countries since 9/11?” • DOJ Attorney Michelle Bennett: “Your Honor, I don’t have that information.” • Judge Robart: “Let me tell you… The answer to that is none, as best I can tell. So, I mean, you’re here arguing on behalf of someone [President Trump] that says: We have to protect the United States from these individuals coming from these...

President Trump’s extreme vetting policy is a temporary, legal and smart use of his national security and immigration powers, the Justice Department said in its legal defense, filed Monday evening, that argues the courts are meddling with the separation of powers. The administration’s lawyers are asking an appeals court to lift a lower judge’s restraining order that has defanged most of Mr. Trump’s Jan. 27 executive order imposing the new vetting policy. The lawyers said immigration law gives Mr. Trump expansive powers to decide whom to let into the U.S. and whom to block, and said that while people who...

When a Seattle Federal Judge, James Robart, imposed a nation wide injunction on portions of President Tump’s executive order, most of the media hastened to noted that he had been appointed by Bush 43. True, but misleading, as noted by Jerome Wohrle at Liberty Unyielding: Judge Robart’s Friday order against Trump sheds little light on his thinking. But at an earlier hearing on Washington State’s motion for a temporary restraining order, he asked what rational basis the government had for restricting entry from the seven countries covered by Trump’s order: Iraq, Iran, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Libya and Yemen. As NPR...

ItÂ’s never a dull day in Donald TrumpÂ’s Washington. ThereÂ’s a lot to unpack in SaturdayÂ’s controversy over the temporary restraining order issued by U.S. District Judge James Robart of the Western District of Washington (based in Seattle) against portions of President TrumpÂ’s executive order on refugees, and TrumpÂ’s ensuing tweets in response. For now, letÂ’s start with what happened. Judge RobartÂ’s decision, handed down Friday night, did four things. First, it concluded that the States of Washington and Minnesota had legal standing to challenge the executive order. Judge Robart seems to have accepted the argument that the states could...

And once declared from the bench "black lives matter". Oh by the way, Judge James Robart, who issued the ruling halting the immigration order on a nationwide basis, is also a Bush appointee, which just goes to show that you can’t tell everything you need to know about a judge by who appointed him. Maybe the pickings were slim in Seattle. By August 2016, it was already well understood by anyone paying attention that “black lives matter” didn’t just mean black lives matter - which of course they do - but rather it was a rallying cry for violent anti-police...

The funniest part of Judge James L. Robart’s cursory, six-and-a-bit-page restraining order against Donald Trump’s executive order -- which temporarily suspends travel into the United States from seven notorious sponsors of terrorism -- comes at the end: "Fundamental to the work of this court is a vigilant recognition that it is but one of three equal branches of our federal government. The work of the court is not to create policy or judge the wisdom of any particular policy promoted by the other two branches. " Ha! What a card! The Left goes shopping for a likeminded judge, and finds...

Send an email to the 'self-appointed acting POTUS' Judge Robart to express your outrage over his dangerous and overreaching decision to allow terrorists into our country! His email address is located within the link. Here it is: robartorders@wawd.uscourts.gov

James Robart, the U.S. district judge in Washington State, offered little explanation for his decision to stop President Trump's executive order temporarily suspending non-American entry from seven terror-plagued countries. Robart simply declared his belief that Washington State, which in its lawsuit against Trump argued that the order is both illegal and unconstitutional, would likely win the case when it is tried. Now the government has answered Robart, and unlike the judge, Justice Department lawyers have produced a point-by-point demolition of Washington State's claims. Indeed, for all except the most partisan, it is likely impossible to read the Washington State lawsuit,...

On February 3, 2017 Federal District Judge James L. Robart issued a temporary restraining order barring the federal executive branch from implementing President Trump’s Executive Order temporarily barring travel from seven terrorist hotspots. The basis for Judge Robart’s order was not the national security of the United States or the proven threat of terrorism immigration from these countries; it was that the plaintiff state (Washington) would be irreparably harmed because, "The Executive Order adversely affects the States' residents in areas of employment, James L. Robarteducation, business, family relations, and freedom to travel... In addition, the States themselves are harmed by...

In a series of nine tweets over the weekend, President Donald Trump defended his executive order temporarily suspending immigration from seven terrorist-infiltrated countries, and he slammed the federal judge in Washington State who temporarily blocked the order, calling him a “so-called judge” in one of his tweets. The liberal media seized on that remark. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), asked if he had “concerns” about Trump’s comment, told CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday, “Yes, I think it is best not to single out judges for criticism. We all get disappointed from time to time at the outcome...

Lawyers for Washington state and Minnesota have told a federal appellate court that restoring President Donald Trump’s ban on refugees and travelers from seven predominantly Muslim countries would “unleash chaos again.” The filing with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco came early Monday after the White House said it expected the federal courts to reinstate the ban. Washington and Minnesota said their underlying lawsuit was strong and a nationwide temporary restraining order was appropriate. If the appellate court reinstated Trump’s ban, the states said the “ruling would reinstitute those harms, separating families, stranding our university students...