DHS and President Trump Respond To Activist Washington State Ruling on Visa Restrictions…

No single issue better reflects the politicized UniParty than immigration.  In all things related to legal or illegal entry into the United States the Democrats and big government Republicans are united in their efforts to create a borderless America; expect little support for President Trump from the GOPe side of the aisle.

Two federal judges, Boston (Mass) and Seattle (WA), released two completely different opinions on the legality of President Trump’s temporary halt on Visa approvals from seven identified countries of concern.  The Boston ruling by Federal Judge Gorton upholds the executive authority and supports President Trump.  The Seattle ruling by Federal Judge Robart halts the executive action.

justice_scalesrefugee-protest

Due to Judge Robart’s refusal to accept prior case law and supreme court rulings, and as an outcome of his inability to cite existing law to support his decision (READ HERE), it is generally believed the Seattle ruling will be “stayed”. The sum total of Robart’s ruling is merely seven pages of activist catch phrases, judicial activism, with no legal guiding citation.

Conversely, Judge Gorton firmly establishes his decision (READ HERE)  -to the benefit of the Executive Order- on prior precedent and current established judicial interpretations, and it is believed Gorton’s decision will be more in line with the final outcome of the challenges.  Gorton’s 21 page ruling contains 51 legal citations to precedent and existing case law which guides his decision.

A good summary of why President Trump will likely win is HERE.

However, in the interim, DHS is complying with the Seattle injunction.

WASHINGTON – In accordance with the judge’s ruling, DHS has suspended any and all actions implementing the affected sections of the Executive Order entitled, “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States.”

This includes actions to suspend passenger system rules that flag travelers for operational action subject to the Executive Order.

DHS personnel will resume inspection of travelers in accordance with standard policy and procedure.

At the earliest possible time, the Department of Justice intends to file an emergency stay of this order and defend the president’s Executive Order, which is lawful and appropriate.  The order is intended to protect the homeland and the American people, and the president has no higher duty and responsibility than to do so.  (read more)

trump-tweet-judge-visa-ban(link)

[…]  Here is where the Boston judge and the Seattle judge appeared to disagree. According to reports of what was said at oral argument in Seattle, the Seattle judge believes rational basis review requires the law-making branches of government “prove” with “facts” presented in court that their position is the correct one. As the Boston judge noted, this interpretation of the law — inviting the judicial branch to replace the elected branches of government — is directly contrary to precedent. This is why the Seattle judge’s opinion is likely to lose out ultimately, and Trump’s will prevail.  (read more)

Advertisements
This entry was posted in 1st Amendment, AG Jeff Sessions, Agitprop, BGI - Black Grievance Industry, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Cultural Marxism, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, DHS, Jeff Sessions, Legislation, media bias, Muslim Grievance Industry - MGI, Occupy Type Moonbats, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Refugees, Secretary of State, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

569 Responses to DHS and President Trump Respond To Activist Washington State Ruling on Visa Restrictions…

  1. sundance says:

    Liked by 27 people

    • Cow wow says:

      Thank you SD!

      Liked by 1 person

    • Howie says:

      Oh Well. This is fishy to me. Dangerous.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Sayit2016 says:

        It is scary for one simple fact—–Only the USSC can make a ruling that impacts the entire US…… local judges control only the local jurisdiction, same with federal judges, they only lead by precedent in the fed district they sit in….. This activist judge knows this and it is worth to him for 48-72 hrs ( or more) to allow these UNVETTED people to come in. He knows damn well he will be reversed based on the law. His ” Dear Diary” wish list of how he wants things to be is irrelevant. This judge needs to be removed from the bench. If one person is harmed by his decision I want the book thrown at him about 100 times…This crap gets my Irish up…..ugh !

        Liked by 10 people

        • NvMtnOldman says:

          The ninth CIRCUS of appeals is all liberal. that is why the libs used a left coast judge. This fraud of a court will uphold the judge and thus sending it to the SC,. The SC at the present time will vote 4-4 thus the ninth court decision stands. The libs win. This is how they do it all the time.

          Liked by 2 people

        • NC PATRIOT says:

          Don’t forget— one Texas Judge held up O’s illegal amnesty order for 2 years.(Judge Hannon )

          Liked by 3 people

        • Diane says:

          Let us just hope when it happens it takes out those people who do not put America first, instead of those innocents who care. Super bowl attack would send a world wide message, have these unpatriotic retards thought of that?

          Liked by 1 person

      • Southern Son says:

        Proof that Communist have Infiltrated All Branches of the US Federal Government!
        Saving my ammo, because we aint Nearly out of the woods yet.
        I Trust President Trump, and All the White Hats True American Patriots, to get This(broad definition) under control.
        If not, My options are remain open for consideration.
        At least at present, I’m not too worried about looking over my shoulder, because the gummit may still be targeting me. Compared to past decade anyway.
        Long Live President Trump!
        And may God Bless America with Peace on Our Shores Again.

        Liked by 4 people

    • stella says:

      Left you a message re this post in the ETH. Hi there!

      Liked by 1 person

    • Meatzilla says:

      Excellent. They’re doing what they said they would do, too.

      I’ll just leave this here now. kthxbye.

      Like

    • Yep, Seattle, just as I thought. Not that Portland OR is any better, but we get enough grief from the dingbats down here, we don’t need any more slings or arrows!

      Liked by 1 person

    • GaryT ✓ᴺᵃᵗᶦᵒᶰᵃˡᶦˢᵗ🇺🇸 says:

      Robarts is most assuredly an activist judge: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/02/04/bush-nominated-judge-who-blocked-trump-s-ban-also-declared-black-lives-matter.html Hence the “emergency” restraining order in my opinion.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Blade says:

      The President will get upside from this no matter the outcome. Its what he does.

      He is following the proper procedure here rather than taking the baited Impeachment Trap.

      They will demand that Ginsberg recuse herself as a former, perhaps still current member of ACLU. It sure is hard to argue that campaign speeches are relevant but words from the Justices past are not. In fact, Ginsberg would be completely disqualified from any case during a Trump administration. They may have reason to demand recusal of the other three Libtards as well for demonstrable reasons found in earlier opinions.

      If the case gets fast-tracked to the still 8-seated Supreme Court he will have a big stick to whack the Congress with, especially the obstructionist (D)ummycrats for holding up the confirmation. Furthermore, his confirmation hearings will hand him reams of read-made campaign material from the Libtard questioners to be used in 2018 and 2020, as well as a mighty stick after another terror attack.

      And God forbid, it is only a matter of time before these savages strike again, probably overseas but maybe even in a School or Office Building or Mall here at home, President Trump will rightly ram it right up their rear ends on Twitter and on camera. He even has a Joint Session and State of the Union upcoming and woe to the opposition if a terrorist attack once again scraps their carefully planned attacks.

      We now have the enemy on record against any possible extra scrutiny at airports and elsewhere despite 9/11 and the thousands of other terror attacks. This was inconceivable even a few years ago. Maybe our beloved (C) talking heads will stop engaging the “other side” on their pseudo-Crossfire shows and just demand answers to some simple questions. ( NOTE: use your best Antonin Scalia voice when reading these, he was the absolute master of pointed hypotheticals during oral arguments ) …

      Counselor, if a religion rather than a nation declares war on the United States of America exactly how does the Constitution allow it to defend itself? Can she declare war on that religion? Can she capture, kill or even scrutinize members of that religion? Are you saying she cannot defend herself in any way against them? The Constitution is a suicide pact?

      Counselor, if a school bus full of kindergarten children is blown up by a burka covered person yelling “Allahu Akbar”, what would be allowable for the Local, State, or Federal government to include on the all points bulletin? Can they even attempt to search for such a person? Should they investigate every person in that city? How can they Constitutionally discriminate to locate that perpetrator?

      Counselor, exactly who attacked the United States of America on 9/11? And exactly who should the USA have gone to war with in the aftermath?

      Ultimately this First Amendment issue has to be cleaned up. On one hand they argue for total and complete incorporation ( its words apply to all branches, not just the enumerated restriction against the Congress ), on the other hand States and Towns and even campuses are doing the opposite with firings for politically incorrect speech with regularity.

      I guess we should consider ourselves pretty lucky that the Islamic murderers are confidant in our own spectacular incompetence that they are free to yelling “Allahu Akbar” when they behead people and kill women, gays and Jews and the rest. In another 100 or 200 years they will wise up and stop praising their “God” during attacks and the self-identifying with hijabs and burkas and the public fatwahs and engage their stealth cloaking device. Then the USA and western civilization, what’s still left of it, will really be screwed.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. Texas2016 says:

    My fear is Trump is going to lose this…the left (including judges) only care about outcomes the law be damned…my guess is the 9th circuit upholds this TRO and the Supreme Court will be 4-4 which means the TRO stands…

    Liked by 2 people

    • Howie says:

      This is dangerous ground I think. They have SJW Judges lined up and waiting. I got a bad feeling about it. They are trying to apply the equal protection clause to the world population. Citizens of the world.

      Liked by 3 people

      • libertysc2016 says:

        If they do, we have a degree of clarity about our state of affairs that will have some value. The rats will be exposed and we will be better able to defend the Republic.

        Liked by 5 people

        • EggsX says:

          I agree. Trump needs to fight this so that America’s enemies must expose themselves for all to see. You can’t fight an enemy you never face.

          In a way, I had some trepidation when Trump would lift the immigration ban, because he would own it from that point forward; conservatives would be blamed for terrorist attacks because they had put in the vetting processes. Now some district judge owns the social costs, potential terrorist attacks, etc. It doesn’t make it better for America but you often can’t change minds until bad things happen.

          All Trump needs to do is find any immigrant now coming over from these countries involved in illegal or terrorist related activity. He has the bully pulpit so he can win this with the public.

          Liked by 8 people

      • James O'Malley says:

        You already see this with second amendment cases, where judges clearly ignore the precedents in Heller and McDonald.

        But Trump will flip the SCOTUS, fill over 100 judicial vacancies, and this’ll all stop.

        Liked by 3 people

      • GaryT ✓ᴺᵃᵗᶦᵒᶰᵃˡᶦˢᵗ🇺🇸 says:

        Our Constitution is not a global document. Why do some think it is?

        Liked by 4 people

    • Joan says:

      Not if Gorsuch is on the Supreme Court.

      Like

    • Martin says:

      He’s not going to lose. What’s with all the concern around here? These corrupt judges are being exposed and it doesn’t look good for any of them.

      Liked by 9 people

    • John Galt says:

      Gorsuch will be on SCOTUS by the time the case arrives.

      Liked by 6 people

    • booger71 says:

      It would be a year or two away from the Supremes, and they pick and chose which cases they take anyway.

      Like

    • The President has plenary powers!

      “On July 4, many Americans turn their thoughts to the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution, looking for wisdom to guide today’s great political controversies.

      One of the key controversies dividing Americans today is immigration. What do our Founding documents say about immigration policy? How do they allocate the power over immigration between the three branches of government?

      The Declaration of Independence speaks directly on immigration. In fact, one of the Founders’ grievances against King George was that he was limiting immigration, by trying “to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither . . .”

      But when the Constitution became the law of the land more than a decade after the signing of the Declaration, immigration was a lesser issue.

      The Constitution only mentions immigration once, stating that Congress has no power to limit the migration of slaves until 1808—it is silent about limiting any other migration, although it gives Congress the power to create a uniform rule of naturalization.

      In the decades after the ratification of the Constitution, the Supreme Court took a leading role in determining how the immigration power would be allocated between the three branches of Government.

      In the end, the Court gave “plenary power”—absolute power—over immigration to Congress and the Executive, in a judicially-created doctrine known as the “plenary power” doctrine.

      Although this concept is found nowhere in the Constitution, the Supreme Court said Congress had the power to make immigration laws that were discriminatory and otherwise unfair.

      In later years, the Court has also allowed Congress to delegate its immigration authority to the Executive Branch.

      Congress has now given away much of its plenary power over immigration to the Executive in sweeping grants of power—more sweeping grants than in any other area of the law.

      For example, Congress has delegated the power to the Executive Branch to determine whether the United States is at war such that military members can be naturalized; to determine whether foreigners should be granted temporary protected status; to determine whether a person is allowed to work in the United States; to grant a person permission to be in the U.S. when the person does not qualify for a visa; and to decide whether a person’s deportation should be deferred.

      As a result of two judicially-created developments—the plenary power doctrine, and the doctrine that Congress may delegate its power to the President—the Executive Branch today enjoys expansive power over immigration.

      Many people recently became upset when the Executive Branch exercised these powers delegated to it by Congress—but until Congress amends or repeals these broad grants of authority to the Executive, the President is on firm legal ground.

      https://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsroom/immigration/b/outsidenews/archive/2015/07/08/immigration-and-the-separation-of-powers-margaret-d-stock.aspx?Redirected=true

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Sandra-VA says:

    This is a good example of what happens when you let these people in:

    And the stupid liberals want to welcome them…

    Even though that was reported in DC, I guarantee you it won’t make national headlines.

    Liked by 9 people

  4. Howie says:

    DDD Report….This will go to the 4 to 4 SCOTUS, not good.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Texian says:

      So the SCOTUS upholds a ruling that is unconstitutional. It then goes to the highest court of all – the American people. It is what the 10th and 2nd Amendments are for.. We are under an invasion..

      Liked by 9 people

    • lastinillinois says:

      4-4?

      Or 5-3?

      Is your 4-4 assuming Roberts vote isn’t needed so he will maintain his cover by voting with Trump?
      If so, I can see that.

      But if a 9 judge court, I’m betting Roberts goes to the invasion side with his vote.

      Like

  5. webgirlpdx says:

    Sundance: The Judge’s ruling came out of Seattle, not Portland.

    Liked by 2 people

  6. TheseTruths says:

    There’s an awful lot of concern about this. I’m optimistic that Pres. Trump and his team are steps ahead of everyone, as they always seem to be, and that they will not get caught in some kind of liberal appeals trap. I don’t know how many lawyers have been writing here, but if laypeople can see the possible progression of…

    order struck down ▶ appeal ▶ 9th Circuit (?) upholds the strike-down ▶ appeal to SCOTUS ▶ SCOTUS decides 4-4, upholding the strike-down

    …then I think Pres. Trump and his team of lawyers and experts can see it, too.

    Isn’t the goal to get Judge Gorsuch in in time for him to adjudicate some SCOTUS cases this term? How quickly would this particular case reach the SCOTUS? Seems like it would take a while. And clearly Pres. Trump knows the Court is 4-4 right now.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. lbmomblog says:

    I am glad President Trump and his administration are complying in the interim, no need to fan this flame.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Martin says:

      Fan what flame? This corrupt judge is the one fanning the flames with this ridiculous ruling.

      Liked by 5 people

      • libertysc2016 says:

        True – the left/globalists are starting fires all over the place. Sometimes there might be value in fighting fire with fire. We must confront the opposition with strength, clarity and certain knowledge that we will prevail.

        Liked by 2 people

      • james23 says:

        Trump ran on restoring the Rule of Law. And he just nominated a big rule of law guy to SCOTUS. He cannot blow off a federal court order, no matter how buffoonish that order is. There is a process for overturning bone headed rulings. President Trump has to respect the process.

        Liked by 9 people

        • Martin says:

          Which is exactly what these corrupt scums want.

          Liked by 1 person

        • libertysc2016 says:

          I agree. However, the left/globalists may be willing to sacrifice order to protect their interests. They openly reject the rule of law in many policy areas, promote/incite political violence, and seek to divide the citizenry along as many lines as possible. Of course, as long as civil order exists and the courts are able to function, we respect the process. We do need to be honest about the challenges we face – this is not a policy debate or simple partisan politics. We are on dangerous terrain.

          Liked by 2 people

  8. Pam says:

    Liked by 2 people

  9. ProgressivismIsAMentalDisorder says:

    I’m sure this has been posted multiple times on this site by now, but according to 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), the President has complete discretion as to barring entry to all aliens or any class of aliens:

    “(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

    Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline.”

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182

    This should be an open-and-shut case and the TRO should be tossed out of the 9th circuit appeals like the piece of garbage it is.

    If Trump decided he didn’t want anyone to be issued VISAs or enter the US wearing yellow shirts tomorrow, he could. The US Constitution does not apply to the entire world and entering this country is a privilege – not a right. Foreigners do not have Constitutional rights!

    Not only is the law firmly on the side of the President, but legal precedent as well. This is a total farce and a complete joke by a political activist judge. Trying to legislate from the bench. It’s a complete abrogation of his duty to apply the laws as they are on the books impartially and he should be impeached.

    Liked by 9 people

    • Howie says:

      Unless social justice is applied and the court rules the statute unconstitutional. Yes, they can do it. All precedents are subject to review. Then there is a new precedent. That there is the danger with these SJW judges licking their chops.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Concerned Virginian says:

      Am still reading through the DOJ appeal document, thank you Sundance.
      But it seems to me that this citation above from USC 1182f should be emailed by MILLIONS of American citizens to the DOJ, the White House, etc.
      And in the meantime—if don’t own a firearm to exercise your Second Amendment rights: get one. If your state has Open Carry: use it. If your state is a “Shall Issue” state for a CCW: get the permit and carry. Know your state’s gun laws. Get good training on how to use your firearm. I would think this goes double for anyone who believes they may be a “target” of the “Religion of Peace” (females, gay people).

      Liked by 4 people

      • justfactsplz says:

        Great advice about guns. I wish my state had open carry but they don’t. I have a CCW and I carry. Everyone should go to the gun range as often as possible and practice, practice practice. Be prepared.

        Liked by 3 people

  10. james23 says:

    Pres Trump and the USA will win the appeal. The bearded buffoon in Seattle did us a big favor and wrote a terrible Order, which contains No findings of fact, no discussion of the likelihood of prevailing on the merits, no discussion of the applicable law, and no weighing of the hardships on both sides. And, no evaluation of Washington’s and Minnesota’s Standing.

    Get ready for Trump’s first appellate win over the Globalists.

    Liked by 12 people

    • Eric Kennedy says:

      What is the politics of the judge in the 9th Circuit? (San Francisco)

      Liked by 1 person

    • Do you or anyone know how long the judge’s temporary block of the EO is for?

      The article just says in the appeal “at the earliest possible time.” Is that 2 weeks? 1 week? longer?

      This is what the appeal says:

      “At the earliest possible time, the Department of Justice intends to file an emergency stay of this order and defend the president’s Executive Order, which is lawful and appropriate. The order is intended to protect the homeland and the American people, and the president has no higher duty and responsibility than to do so.”

      Liked by 1 person

    • WeThePeople2016 says:

      I have seen in some recent cases the Supreme Court scold the lower courts for terrible rulings and this Robart’s ruling fits the bill. They send it back to the lower courts and tell them to clean up their mess. I am not a lawyer, but if this is as bad as SD and others says, I would guess that even the 9th circuit, which is probably full of liberal lawyers, does not want to uphold this one because they know the outcome down the road.

      Liked by 2 people

  11. LM says:

    When President Clinton took office he fired all of the federal prosecutors….or rather, Janet Reno did.

    This was such a great idea I hope that President Trump does it also. He could even name it after them….something like informing the public that he is following the “Clinton option”.

    http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/brent-baker/2007/03/13/nets-didnt-care-about-clinton-firing-93-us-attorneys-lead

    Liked by 7 people

  12. Carnaby says:

    Civil War 1
    The Union vs. The Confederacy

    Civil War 2
    Nationalists vs. Globalists

    The globalists, not only outside, but within the US wanting to give non citizens the same rights as US citizens. Like with refugees, globalists see them as their rights being violated with the EO, as if the refugees were US citizens.

    Liked by 7 people

  13. Martin says:

    Liked by 6 people

  14. gofer says:

    The 9th circuit has established precedent…….

    “Immigration law includes a “delicate policy judgment” courts must not invade, as the Supreme Court itself said, and the Boston judge reiterated. Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982). As the Ninth Circuit reiterated, “we defer to the political branches in the immigration field.” Ruiz-Diaz v. United States, 703 F.3d 483 (9th Cir. 2012)”

    Liked by 6 people

  15. Nyse1 says:

    Why can’t federal refugee resettlement money be pulled as you know it pays for their airfare also. Now that would not stop the citizens of those counties coming but we are paying for refugees to come here. Federal court can not say how we spend money.

    Liked by 6 people

    • libertysc2016 says:

      The “cause” clouds the judgement of many judges. All precedent, all logic, all reason bows to the movement. The judge’s decision in Washington is the stuff of fantasy and political delusion.

      Liked by 1 person

  16. wyntre says:

    A decent discussion of the TRO and Appeal at Legal Insurrection.

    Conclusion:

    “The issue is not whether the Executive Order is wise, it’s over who gets to make the decision on what constitutes necessary security procedures with regard to foreigners wanting to enter the U.S. That decision in the past always has been reserved to the executive branch.”

    http://legalinsurrection.com/2017/02/absurd-fed-ct-tro-halts-enforcement-of-entire-executive-order-on-visas-refugees/

    Liked by 5 people

  17. repsort says:

    He needs to expect this at every turn… Will this type of crap bog him down? I think this will embolden them…

    Liked by 2 people

  18. Here’s a differing opinion and this attorney urges we contact Senator Grassley to urge him to start Judiciary Committee hearings to confirm Gorsuch ASAP.

    “Trump Must See Gorsuch Confirmed Or The TRO On Muslim Ban Will Stay”

    “Decision by Judge Robart goes to the most liberal 9th Circuit. Senate has to confirm Gorsuch with 51 votes ASAP or the order will stand” By Attorney Orly Taitez
    Posted on | February 4, 2017 | 5 Comments

    {snippet}

    “Dems picked WA state to attack the executive order on temporary immigration ban for a reason. It is a part of the most liberal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and there is a high probability that the 9th Circuit would uphold the order. It will go to the Supreme Court next, which will probably rule on party lines 4/4. In this case the ruling of the lower court stays. President Trump should not file with the Supreme Court until Gorsuch is seated.

    “Call Senator Grassley, urge him to start Judiciary Committee hearings to confirm Gorsuch ASAP and call Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell, urge him to use the nuclear option, meaning 51 vote confirmation, for Gorsuch ASAP. Gorsuch should be seated as the tie-breaker 9th judge before the temporary immigration ban is heard by the Supreme Court.”

    http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/decision-by-judge-robart-goes-to-the-most-liberal-9th-circuit-senate-has-to-confirm-gorsuch-with-51-votes-asap-or-the-order-will-stand/

    IN ANY CASE FELLOW PATRIOTS FIGHT AND DEFEND BUT DO NOT WORRY. HAVE FAITH IN GOD and always remember we went through this fear mongering doubt and worry all throughout the primary and election. Stand strong and stay FIRM. God did not send us Trump just to watch America fall. COURAGE! STAY THE COURSE! WE ARE WINNING! KEEP PRAYING! CALL GRASSLEY AND/OR KEEP DOING ALL YOU CAN BUT DON’T HAVE FEAR. He shall be called EMMANUEL which means God is with us.

    Liked by 7 people

    • TheseTruths says:

      I agree that it’s in everyone’s best interest to have Gorsuch confirmed ASAP. I also know that Attorney Orly Taitz, while she is a patriot whose heart is in the right place, has not been the most effective in arguing before the Courts. She has been active in Obama birth certificate issues for years, but the Cold Case Posse did not choose to have her in their inner circle. I’m not disparaging her — I appreciate her hard work and patriotism — I just would not choose her to be the one advising me on matters like this. The things she is saying are exactly what all the laypeople here have been saying.

      Liked by 4 people

    • smiley says:

      fresh hell, this.

      Like

  19. wyntre says:

    I have to agree with housecracker, here.

    Liked by 5 people

  20. wyntre says:

    Liked by 4 people

  21. Tazz2293 says:

    Trump is the President. Trump needs to put his boot on this ruling and his departments then order the People’s government to follow his and our orders!

    Liked by 2 people

  22. In AZ says:

    http://www.westernjournalism.com/exclusive-investigative-reports/who-funds-the-radical-left-in-america/

    Good article on who funds the commie anarchists, besides Soros. ( Soros is on the list in the article )

    Liked by 1 person

  23. patrickhenrycensored says:

    The Justice Department has alerted a court in Washington state that it is appealing the judge’s ruling from a day earlier.
    The appeal is to be filed Saturday night with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
    http://www.breitbart.com/news/the-latest-doj-acts-to-appeal-ruling-lifting-travel-ban/

    Liked by 2 people

    • CheeseHead says:

      They will lose that appeal. 9th circuit is most liberal of any. They probably have illegal immigrants as their law clerks.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Howie says:

      I smell a Rat!

      Liked by 1 person

    • armie says:

      It’s just a bare bones notice of appeal with no attached request for a stay. I’m not up on procedure in the Circuit Courts, is there an arrangement like the Supreme Court for emergency appeals, or does the notice just go into the hopper pending whatever setting or filing comes next?

      Liked by 1 person

      • patrickhenrycensored says:

        I haven’t seen the text of the appeal yet.

        Like

        • armie says:

          From the practice guide, it appears you file a notice of appeal with the district court in question, then file the actual appeal with the Ninth. Their Motions Panel page says they have to be notified before filing for expedited matters, so (depending on whether they answer the phone on weekends) we may be waiting until Monday for the actual appeal filing.

          Liked by 1 person

      • patrickhenrycensored says:

        The Department of Justice declined to comment on the appeal “beyond the filing at this time,” in an email to AFP.

        Like

      • Howie says:

        You have to file the notice in a timely manner. Then the appeal must be in a time limit.

        Like

  24. armie says:

    You know… refreshing as I usually find DJT’s communications, I think he’s gone over the top on one aspect of this issue. Federal Judges hold life time appointments, so about the only thing referring to one of them as a “so-called judge” accomplishes is to get you an enemy for your entire term of office.

    There’s an old joke about the three most important rules of practicing criminal law, they are:
    1. Get the fee up front
    2. Don’t p**s off the judge
    3. Never take a gang case with a client named (pick a name associated with an organized crime group, in the original joke it was “Guido”). They don’t take losing well.

    Trump just violated rule two. When he was elected to office, he inherited a new set of people whose welfare he’s responsible for. In some cases, toning down his rhetoric may not allow for the same satisfactions as he had in the campaign days, but to the extent that it avoids acquiring enemies who have the ability to harm his constituents, it’s the wise thing to do.

    The rest of the comments, I’m down with. A personal attack on the judge, not so much.

    Let the advocates do the advocating, he represents all of us now.

    Liked by 1 person

    • milo minderbinder says:

      STFU.

      Like

    • redsequin4 says:

      He doesn’t like activists judges who legislate from the bench. I’m glad he spoke out, this TRO will be lifted but in the meantime it allows potential terrorists to come in to the country, since they know the door will be slammed shut again soon.

      Liked by 3 people

    • ProgressivismIsAMentalDisorder says:

      Or this could just be more of Trump’s 5D chess, which he effectively employs to bait and dominate the leftist MSM. Judge Robart was a Bush appointee and confirmed in the senate 99-0 unanimously.

      If the MSM and the lefties take the bait, they will be decrying Trump’s statement! Oh the humanity! Trump called this man a “so-called judge”! The left and the MSM come rushing to his defense and praise him for being non-partisan, as he was a Bush appointee and how upstanding he is. That he is refreshing and exactly what we need out of a judge in the USA on the federal courts.

      Then…BOOM

      Judge Gorsuch? Also a Bush appointee who was unanimously confirmed in the Senate.

      Trump walks them right into it again.

      Who knows? He is really great at this.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Sayit2016 says:

      A judicious Judge would not make this ruling. Thus the ” so called Judge” comment. A Judge is not a God to be tip-toed around. Respect is given when respect is earned.

      Liked by 2 people

      • armie says:

        That’s true. A judge is also not someone you go out of your way to pi** off by announcing that he’s not qualified to hold his job. He could spend the next four years throwing roadblocks in every executive action. Why buy unnecessary grief? You can vigorously question and contest the decision without being contemptuous about the judge.

        Like

    • freegz says:

      Except this isn’t a criminal case. This judge will have very little else to say on the matter.

      Liked by 1 person

    • libertysc2016 says:

      So you think Trump’s tweet could impact the decisions judge’s make? With serious national security interests at play? Really? If they sacrifice the legitimacy of the judicial branch because Trump offended their sensibilities, we are in serious trouble. No credible man or woman would operate in such a manner. If your suggestion is correct, we have some really petty people serving in the judiciary. If not, your logic is off.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Interesting point libertysc2016 about President Trump, may I say that again, President Trump of The United States being concerned that his tweet might impact this judges decision.

        As usual, President Trump tweeted what he did on purpose with no fear from a judge that can not even file a properly written legal document.

        You are so right that our President has no worry or concern about this chucklehead judge.

        Our enemies might have filed their legal challenge in the court district of their choice for the best leverage.

        But they sure did pick a loser judge to write the document for their side.

        Liked by 4 people

    • louche9 says:

      It’s a fair bet that Robart was an “enemy” of Trump from go. All playing nice does is embolden the Left.

      Liked by 1 person

  25. CheeseHead says:

    The “ban” was only to be in effect for 90 days, right? By the time this works through the jurisprudence mill it would’ve been over anyway. Trump’s DHS and DOS team will have their extreme vetting in place with very few visas issued to immigrants from the countries in question. Meanwhile if bad guys get though in the next couple months and do something terrible a “thank you” note goes to Judge James Robart, facilitator of terrorism.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Howie says:

      If we lose this then the 14th amendment due process clause will apply to all citizens of the world even though they are not in the USA. Think about it. This is insane.

      Liked by 3 people

      • armie says:

        One other possible interpretation is that the states of Washington and Minnesota have become responsible for the welfare of everyone in the world.

        Like

        • woohoowee says:

          And those two states would just unload their responsibilities on the rest of us.

          Liked by 2 people

          • armie says:

            Sad, but probably true.

            Liked by 1 person

          • redsequin4 says:

            Minnesota has around 25,000 Somalis and Washington state has refugees from Iraq, Somalia and Iran, three of the countries on the list. So it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see which states are fighting this. Washington state also has many sanctuary cities and counties that won’t accept ICE detainers.

            The TRO will be lifted but meanwhile it’s stall, stall, stall. Now the Dems will have more reason to slow the Judge Gorsuch confirmation because if this goes to SCOTUS and it’s a 4/4 split, it kicks it back to the lower court.

            But the point is to make a huge fuss and give the anarchists plenty of time to organize, riot and protest the EO, with lots of MSM fake news spread around to the sheeple. Their goal is to disrupt the President at every turn.

            Liked by 3 people

        • libertysc2016 says:

          These two states have put themselves at odds with the interests of the U.S., every other state, and all citizens. No nation state can or should accept the ruling submitted by the judge in Washington. The ruling is a hostile act designed to gut the Republic.

          Like

        • But if we are 50 sovereign states why would one or two states impact other states’ sovereignty? That can’t be legal.

          Like

      • The Recent Republican says:

        If you know anything about the 9th Circuit of Appeals, you know what they will decide in regards to Federal Judge Robart’s ruling. Hint: it does not favor the President.

        The left set this one up beautifully. They are dirty as a mud-soaked pig and the ruling itself is a joke, but thy play to win. And I have a feeling (especially if they succeed here), it will be their game plan for the rest of Trump’s presidency. Lawsuit, friendly selected judge, idiotic ruling, 9th Circuit. Right up to the Supreme Court which could take a year or more. Even if Gorsuch gets on the bench, that could bog Trump’s presidency down completely.

        Trump and his administration will have to really find creative ways of navigating through the snake pit, because what happened here is just the beginning. And the odds look shaky to me on this one (9th Circuit, deadlocked 4-4 SC) — despite the law being on Trump’s side — which probably explains his frustration. Right or wrong has nothing to do with it. It’s how the Democrats maneuvered and got the thing mapped out.

        As for the 14th amendment covering the citizens of the world, I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s their ultimate goal. The left would kill for that.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Howie says:

          I can smell it a mile away.

          Like

        • Howie says:

          Note the lib in Boston setting up the conflict between districts. A perfect entry for SCOTUS certiorari.

          Like

          • The Recent Republican says:

            I agree with you. Their goal is for a much larger victory that just holding the line. That doesn’t gain them too much. No, what they want is for laws (or amendments) to be redefined and changed to suit their objectives.

            The Democrats are not stupid. They are relentless.

            Like

        • libertysc2016 says:

          Maybe you are right – but the left would have to kill many to realize that goal. The 9th circuit can choose to side with the district court but it is not an outcome any nation state could accept.

          Like

        • I have faith in GOD that he would not give us a champion in Donald Trump only to let Satan’s minions move the football at the kickoff. No way.

          Like

        • redsequin4 says:

          “As for the 14th amendment covering the citizens of the world, I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s their ultimate goal. The left would kill for that.”

          Will never happen, that would mean billions of foreign nationals could sue the US for not allowing them entry.

          Liked by 1 person

      • tvollrath66 says:

        Gonna need lots more tax money to support all of them. Guess we won’t need military all one big happy family…makes me sick.

        Like

  26. roxiellTX says:

    Praying and watching for the backfire.

    Liked by 1 person

  27. wyntre says:

    Another good analysis of the EO and why Trump will win:

    On Trial: Why Trump’s Immigration Ban Will Win Over Seattle Judge’s Nationwide Order

    http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/on-trial-why-trumps-immigration-ban-will-win-over-seattle-judges-nationwide-stay/

    Liked by 2 people

  28. milo minderbinder says:

    Pitchfork. Check. Torch. Check. Gimme an address.

    Like

  29. redsequin4 says:

    It’s a stall tactic by the left. See how the all the visa holders are rushing in from those countries before the TRO is lifted and the door slammed shut again. Do you think terrorists might take advantage of this lull now they know our President is not going to be pushed around and means it when he says extreme vetting?

    Liked by 2 people

  30. frogstamper says:

    I’m not an attorney.
    Donald Trump is not stupid.
    He does not get “Set up.”
    The people pulling these stunts should be afraid – very afraid.
    Three aforementioned truths and one aforementioned opinion.

    Liked by 5 people

  31. M. Mueller says:

    So, millions and millions voted to get this President in so our country could be safe, and one, unelected by anybody, Judge can just put us all back in danger? Does that make sense to anybody?

    I hope that if anything bad happens in the future, it is all put right on that judge’s head. Frustrating! Tired of these games!

    Liked by 1 person

  32. parteagirl says:

    Liked by 4 people

  33. Howie says:

    Alls it takes are a couple crackpots on the 9th circuit and 4 crackpots on SCOTUS to screw it up royally and cause a YUUUUGE Constitutional CRISIS. The Mother of all Constitutional crisis. This is a set up folks. I will be astonished if it is not. I advise stall, drop it, do anything but appeal this.

    Like

    • Eric Kennedy says:

      I tend to agree with Howie here.

      Liked by 1 person

      • libertysc2016 says:

        I think it is more like a “please don’t throw me in that briar patch” scenario for Trump. The Washington judge’s ruling has no merit and is at odds with core national security interests of the United States of America. This is not close – if the 9th circuit and Supreme Court do not remedy the situation we will have a crisis and the nature of our struggle will be clear.

        Like

    • TheseTruths says:

      “This is a set up folks.”
      What has happened is exactly what any thinking person would have predicted. The Left will do anything they can to promote their agenda and stop the conservative one. It isn’t a surprise; it was to be expected.

      For it to be a setup, in my opinion, there would have to be collusion between the judge who made this ruling and those on the 9th Circuit, for a predetermined outcome. While I think they are ideologues, I also think there are some things that are too risky, even for them.

      Like

  34. Texas2016 says:

    If Trump loses this…he should resettle all refugees next door to this judge, these State AGs, governors, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Shumer, and every other SJW lawyer, politician, celebrity, etc

    Liked by 1 person

    • Howie says:

      If he loses this there will no longer be any refugees. Everyone on the planet will have recourse under the due process clause in the 14th amendment wherever they are.

      Like

      • libertysc2016 says:

        Those are not conditions that any nation state could or would accept. If the Supreme Court renders such a decision they are not legitimate.

        Like

      • benifranlkin says:

        I think u should stick to posting the world’s most apropos mini-movies of which u r king. U r drowning in the deep end of absurd with your last 2 comments. Trump has essentially defused the stay of his EO with his “oh well, we’ll just appeal to the 9th Circus”. All his concern tweets are head fakes. Meanwhile no one short of the Virgin Mary and Jesus will be issued visas from the ME, he’ll sic the IRS on illegals collecting benefits, and sanctuary cities will be spinning out illegals like electrons. There is plenty to do in the interim, so much so, everyone will forget about this EO as it will soon be moot.

        Like

  35. LULU says:

    If the concern trolls want something to worry about, it should be the unvetted persons who flocked to fly here while this wacko activist judge’s injunction is in force. If you were a jihadist, wouldn’t you grab the opportunity?

    Like

    • libertysc2016 says:

      You are right – the judge opened the door wide open. He is not fit to serve. The companies, Govs, and AGs that supported the case also deserve attention.

      Like

  36. MThomps says:

    Our fathers warned of judicial tyranny, which we have been living under. For example, a federal judge recently ordered this to a civil litigant:

    “You are a fool, a fool, a fool, a fool to screw with a federal judge, and if you don’t understand that, I can make you understand it … I have the full force of the Navy, Army, Marines and Navy behind me,”

    http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/12/california-attorney-dallas-judges-shred-constitution-steal-millions/

    Liked by 1 person

  37. Eric Kennedy says:

    Like

  38. Eric Kennedy says:

    Liked by 1 person

  39. beelza says:

    Never in my life could I have imagined that I, my family and fellow citizenry would literally be in a daily war with our government (save the Trump Admin), and corporations. A war for my God given freedoms, a war for my body and health. Absolutely extraordinary and revolting. Alas, at least I have awakened.

    Liked by 3 people

  40. amml says:

    Here we go again, people. We finally get someone in our White House who loves, respects, and understands our Constitution and rule of law and what happens? Some unknown judge in the state of Washington makes a ruling not just for that state but for all 50 states regarding immigration. How many times have we seen this happen with extremely important issues while we stand by helplessly wondering what can we do to stop it?

    Those on the left think they’ve won this the same way they thought they won the election, but a third party intervened. No, not Vladimir Putin as so many thought. The third party was the one, the only- His name is God. God cannot be outsmarted, cannot be outwitted; He is all-knowing, and the same way He helped us on election night, He will do battle for us again and again and again. Because He knows, as we know, we’re all on the right side.

    So keep the faith don’t give up! This is far from over!

    Liked by 4 people

  41. Paco Loco says:

    Amazon, Microsoft, Starbucks, Expedia are setting themselves up for anti-trust investigations by the DoJ. This could really end up as a boomerang to these oh so smart and powerful Seattle kingpins who pushed this wanker judge to place the TRO on the EO. There will be consequences.

    Liked by 2 people

  42. TONYA PARNELL says:

    JUDGE ROBARD HAS AN AGENDA. HE IS BLACK LIVES MATTER ACTIVIST AND DOES PRO BONO WORK FOR REFUGEES

    Liked by 1 person

  43. UKExpat says:

    Apart from the fact that he did NOTHING wrong Trump has PRECEDENCE on his side FIVE immediately previous Presidents also issued IMMIGRATION bans, OBOZO did it 19 TIMES one of them being IRAQ too. So where were these POLITICIZED LEFTARD JUDGES and the RIOTING, LOOTING, BURNING , VIOLENT LEFTARD NAZI STORM TROOPERS then. It is not the job of Judges to LEGISLATE it is to simply INTERPRET existing Laws and Trump broke NO LAWS

    Like

  44. UKExpat says:

    What thse POLITICIZED LEFTARD Judges are doing is ensuring that any appointments Trump makes will be heavily scrutinized first.and that every opportunity to dismiss them will be seized on.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s