It is absurd to think it “unconstitutional” to take national security measures to protect the American people. Other Presidents have instituted immigration measures; why is President Trump exempt? And where in the Constitution does it say that terrorists or any foreign national have a constitutional right to come here?
For those who never fully understood how deeply the enemies of freedom have firmly entrenched themselves in the courts, academia, government agencies, etc., this should be a wake-up call. Those of us doing this work day in, day out are keenly aware, but America is getting a real education in just how subversive and dangerous the left is.
They know where to file these lawsuits and which judges to go before. The web is extensive and well-funded.
This was another Bush spineless liberal appointee. The notorious activist U.S. District Judge James Robart has expressed a strong anti-police bias when dealing with a case involving Seattle police union’s contract negotiations. Judge Robart went on a rant against police and proclaimed, “Black Lives Matter.”
Robart is an activist judge who sees the court system as means to change law, not enforce it.
This is why the Supreme Court is so critical to our defense of freedom.
Bush-appointed judge halts Trump travel ban nationwide
The Hill, By Brooke Seipel – 02/03/17:
: A federal judge in Seattle issued a temporary nationwide restraining order Friday stopping President Trump’s executive order banning citizens of seven countries from entering the United States.
Judge James Robart, who was appointed by former President George Bush in 2003, ruled the executive order would be stopped nationwide, effective immediately.
“The Constitution prevailed today,” Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson said in a statement after the ruling. “No one is above the law — not even the President.”
“It’s our president’s duty to honor this ruling and I’ll make sure he does,” Ferguson added.
The ruling, made at the request of Washington and Minnesota, is the broadest to date against Trump’s executive order.
Ferguson, a Democrat, filed the lawsuit three days after Trump signed the executive order. The suit argued that the travel ban targets Muslims and violates constitutional rights of immigrants and their families.
The White House pledged action “at the earliest possible time” in a late Friday statement.
“At the earliest possible time, the Department of Justice intends to file an emergency stay of this order and defend the executive order of the President, which we believe is lawful and appropriate,” the late Friday statement read.
The White House initially labeled the judge’s action an “outrageous order” but within 10 minutes had sent a second, nearly identical statement that stripped out that adjective.
“The president’s order is intended to protect the homeland and he has the constitutional authority and responsibility to protect the American people,” it continued.
The State Department said it was working with the Department of Homeland Security to determine how the ruling affects operations, according to CNN.
In an interview with CNN Friday evening, Ferguson said he “expected win, lose or draw” that the case would move “fairly quickly through, up to the Ninth Circuit” Court of Appeals — “just because of the magnitude of the executive order.”
“I’m prepared for this case to go all the way to the Supreme Court whichever way the Ninth Circuit Court of appeals goes,” he said, anticipating a challenge to Robart’s ruling. “It’s a case of that magnitude, it’s a case that frankly I think will ultimately end up before the U.S. Supreme Court, so that would not surprise me one way or the other.”
Lawyers for the government had argued the states lacked standing to sue, according to the Seattle Times, and that the order was within Trump’s executive powers.
But the judge rejected that argument, saying the states had already suffered harm from the travel ban. He also said the lawsuit challenging the legality of the order has a good chance of succeeding.
“It’s a wonderful day for the rule of law in this country,” said Washington state solicitor general Noah Purcell, according to Reuters.
Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), who grew emotional discussing the travel ban last weekend, praised the ruling in a Friday night statement.
“This ruling is a victory for the Constitution and for all of us who believe this un-American executive order will not make us safer. President Trump should heed this ruling and he ought to back off and repeal the executive order once and for all.
Trump’s action bans people from Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Sudan and Somalia from entering the U.S. for 90 days, and temporarily halts the United States’ refugee resettlement program for 120 days, while indefinitely suspending resettlement for refugees from Syria.
The order, issued last Friday, immediately stirred controversy when travelers who were en route to the U.S. when it was signed were detained at airports. Protesters demonstrated at airports across the county last weekend.
CNN reported that Customs and Border Protection held a 9 p.m. call with airlines and said it’s “back to business as usual” in the wake of the judge’s action.
Reporter Jon Ostrower added that the systems that flagged and blocked travelers from the seven countries named in the ban were being lifted and rescinded visas were being reissued.