Ninth Circuit Court Now Demands It Be Protected From Itself…

Oh, the winning… it’s often too funny. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is now independently, on its own impetus, requesting an internal vote on a full panel en banc hearing to review its own decision.

Additionally, the full ninth are asking the Trump administration to file an additional brief telling the court why the three member original appeals ruling authority was wrong.   In essence, the smart judges know what wasn’t considered, and are now looking for an out.

You just can’t make this stuff up.

Prior to expanding the conversation, allow us to set the current stage with a few tweet optics:

9th-circuit-29th-circuit-3

Wait, wha… huh? Yes, that’s the 9th circuit requesting its own judicial membership ruling to be reviewed by the entire larger 9th circuit appeals court panel. Ya think maybe they recognize they just jumped head-first into showcasing their own insufferable moonbattery…

Meanwhile, President Trump is saying he has no intentions to challenge the crazy:

9th-circuit-4

It’s a classic representative example of ‘be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it‘.

Currently, thanks to the ridiculous political judicial opinion of the 9th Circuit, the entire professional left and Democrat party are on display trying to block President Trump from protecting the American people. As a direct consequence they own any negative outcomes, including any act of terrorism, that might happen in the next several months.

Why would President Trump remove that political liability?  If he’s smart, and he’s proven he is way beyond smart, he won’t.

Behind the scenes, and unrelated to the judicial ruling, President Trump can use his cabinet team to construct immigration and visa review policy that accomplishes the security goal.  The Attorney General (Sessions), DHS (Kelly) and State Department (T-Rex) can execute departmental policy objectives under existing legal authority.

President Trump never really needed the majority parts of the executive order to carry out the security agenda.  However, using the XO provided a highly public approach toward showing the American electorate he was fulfilling a campaign security promise.  Tightening the visa approval process and executing “extreme vetting” doesn’t require anything except a policy and procedural change.

If President Trump does nothing, the underlying challenges to the Executive Order continue forward in the courts, while he gets his SCOTUS pick -Gorsuch- on the bench.  If he so chooses, the DOJ can eventually bring the case to the Supreme Court, where almost everyone admits the Ninth Circuit and Judge Robarts decision will be overturned and all of the protestation from the left will have been for naught.

In the interim of the slow case proceeding, ANY instance of violence and terrorism provides President Trump the opportunity to use his bully pulpit -and Twitter- to hang the occurrence, foreign or domestic, like a millstone around the neck of Democrats up for elected office in 2018.

There is no downside on the domestic security agenda for President Trump; however, the Democrats are fraught with fear that something might just happen.  Ultimately, THIS, the politics behind the entire construct, is the reason for the ninth circuit tonight asking for an en banc hearing of their own judicial ruling.

Smile, you’re worth it.

trump-complicated-business

…”Complicated business folks…. complicated business”…

Oh boy, I just can’t wait for the Trump budget.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in 1st Amendment, AG Jeff Sessions, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Cultural Marxism, Death Threats, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Election 2017, Illegal Aliens, ISIS, Islam, Jeff Sessions, Jihad, Legislation, media bias, Muslim Grievance Industry - MGI, Occupy Type Moonbats, Political correctness/cultural marxism, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Refugees, Secretary of State, Secretary Tillerson, Supreme Court, Terrorist Attacks, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

918 Responses to Ninth Circuit Court Now Demands It Be Protected From Itself…

  1. Bacall says:

    Just reading Scott Johnson at Powerline blog that the request for an en banc review of the 9th Circuit decision came sua sponte (from among the judges, not one of the parties to the hearing/case). This would be hilarious if the national security issues weren’t so serious. As Johnson says, “Get me out of here.” I would expect the youthful judges serving en banc will be even more Mosby like. Can California and the Pacific Northwest get worse or less serious about the future of America? I read not too long ago about a DOJ attorney in red-state Idaho suppressing public knowledge of the case of refugee gang rape of a developmentally disabled child because it would hurt Muslim refugee relations. (Sound like Sweden or Germany?) Just tapping the surface of the denigration of DOJ and federal courts going back to the 1960s.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Not ID DOJ, it was Wendy J. Olson, the Obama-appointed U.S. Attorney for Idaho and Twin Falls ID county prosecuting attorney, Grant Loebs. Add the city council to the mix. The whole town is FUBAR’d in the head. The little girl now wears 2 t-shirts and 2 pairs of underwear. She hides in the closet at times. It sickens me she has been damaged in so many ways.

      Like

    • trublutopaz says:

      California already has a serious income division between the very rich and the very poor. A prime example would be San Francisco, which is offering “free” college tuition, but in a city where few real college students can afford to live. Middle class families are seeking a way out and when they leave, there goes the tax base that Sacramento has been using to fund boondoggles like the high speed railway. It makes no sense to have potholes in the street while building this thing. There will be a point where the few and the rich have to fend for themselves and when that happens, there will be serious social implications for everyone involved. My solution is we sell SF to the Chinese-who own most of it already-and get our debts reduced. Liberals get the communism they claim to want and we get rid of them for good. It’s a win-win.

      Like

  2. Paul Keller says:

    Arrest them

    Liked by 2 people

  3. kathyca says:

    An explanation of the en banc review procedure from the 9th Circuit. Notice how, at the end, they try to make it sound commonplace, but then give the statistic that shows only 3% of en banc review requests are made by judges, as opposed to litigants. It also avoids saying how many of the VERY small percentage of en banc requests that are granted (only 15-25, so about 1%) are sua sponte requests made by a judge v. requests made by a litigant. Sorry. This is so interesting to me lol

    http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2017/02/10/En_Banc_Summary2.pdf

    Liked by 5 people

    • Practicing law from the bench is a high misdemeanor: 28 USC 454. We don’t find any authority at 28 USC 46 for a Circuit Court Judge to request “sua sponte” a rehearing en banc. An “order” requires a MOTION, and when Federal Judges “move” themselves, that is best described as practicing law from the bench.

      Liked by 3 people

      • kathyca says:

        I don’t find any authority for it either, actually. The applicable rule (Rule 35) refers to requests by a party and the applicable statute (28 usc 46) is silent on the application. In fact, reading the comments to Rule 35, they suggest that the “suggestion” for a rehearing en banc MUST have come from a party and then requested by a member of the panel who made the decision. Yet the statement I posted from the 9th circuit website specifically states that about 3% of the requests are sua sponte. Hmmmm….

        Liked by 3 people

      • If a fool is his own lawyer, is a judge who makes himself his own adversary a total fool, a partial fool, or a temporary fool? Is there such a thing as a “wise” fool?

        Like

    • A political tactic to start deflecting criticism from a poorly considered tribunal ruling? And they want the DOJ to provide more reasons why the ruling is an error? So the can fix the mess internally. I bet the DOJ will not fall into that hole. Let the court stew in their own juices. Allready reading of probable Congressional action to break up this court. The tribunal has sowed their own breakup.

      Liked by 5 people

    • shallbe4 says:

      Why can’t these Leftists idiots just check out how Merkel now feels to have to pay these Illegals to leave Germany. Why must we make the same mistake when the truth is out there all over Europe?

      Liked by 1 person

    • trublutopaz says:

      Considering the Ninth Circus’ (sic) rate of overturned decisions, you’d think someone would shut them down, break them up and simply start over.

      Like

  4. Pied Piper says:

    Help! I can’t this off my shoe!!

    Liked by 2 people

  5. recoverydotgod says:

    Wow!

    In the ABAJournal article, the Trump’s Executive Order does not appear to be linked…but Trump’s tweets definitely are. 🙂

    http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/ninth_circuit_lets_stand_restraining_order_against_trump_travel_ban

    -snip-
    In response, ABA President Linda Klein told the ABA House of Delegates Monday that “the independence of the judiciary is not up for negotiation.”
    -snip-

    Liked by 1 person

    • Nobody of Import says:

      The “Independence” doesn’t GIVE them the Authority to DO what they’ve done there.

      From the Judge in Washington State exceeding the limits of his Jurisdiction,

      To upholding a Void ruling (prior item) and setting themselves up for an En Banc review without Authority.

      Each and every one of these Judges are subject to Impeachment proceedings for the various crimes these aforementioned actions constitute.

      Like

  6. jameswlee2014 says:

    I have a degree in Experimental Psychology from UC San Diego. Got a A+ in Abnormal Psychology (that’s Abie Normal to YF fans), and I can tell you that what we are seeing is Dissociative Personality Disorder on an industrial scale. This occurs when an event so horrible the mind cannot bear to admit its reality simply changes the beholder into a different person, one who has either forgotten the event or is so radically changed, they can now cope with the new reality,

    In either case it leads to behavior so bizarre that the individual can no longer function in everyday society because their behavior is so unpredictably weird. In any case, the disorder usually signals an unmendable break with reality and normally require institutionalization and continual monitoring by compassionate professionals. They should not be making public statements as they will only serve to boost those they oppose.

    Liked by 3 people

    • shallbe4 says:

      I could understand if this was only about 9/11 but these acts of terror are going on all the time. When does it become obvious even if all the Leftists have Personality Disorder that stabbing people, cutting off heads and throwing people off buildings are not the acts of normal people that we want as next door neighbors?

      Liked by 3 people

    • James W Lee 2014……..Your scholarly description of dissociative personality disorder and its symptoms sound very much like the Democratic party at large right now. Sure glad we have so many smart and informative readers who comment here; I learn a lot from you all. Just out of curiosity, what would you call the group who dress in black, come very organized and weaponized and are paid by Soros? What disorder are they? One of the _____path ones (psychopath or sociopath)? What gets me is that there are even women in there doing hurting people. I’m just a grandma whose generation of females were not raised that way.

      Liked by 1 person

    • katherine009 says:

      What hump?

      Like

  7. Jgraber says:

    Lol, someone must have figured out that they stepped in it big league. Prez has always been played chess while everyone eles is playing checkers.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Glenn Festog says:

      Chess? What Trump is doing looks a whole lot more like Ali’s “rope a dope”; why not? Ali fought in the ” boxing arena”, Trump in the “political arena”; both constitute entertainment. Lol

      “Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee”; Trump vs Demos a beautiful thing to see! Lol

      Like

  8. Bonitabaycane says:

    Why would our President want to take another invited ride in the 9th Circuit Clown car? Any required brief could simply state that DOJ respectfully declines to join in a motion to reconsider. Let those Bozos drown in the sewage of their own opinion. Do not jump in to save them Mr. President!

    Liked by 2 people

  9. Clay Diggs says:

    section 1182(f) could not be more clear. DT referenced it in his EO but it was IGNORED by the washington judge and the 9th circuit. i’m no lawyer but even I know what DT did was Constitutional and well within his authority. these four judges must be impeached and removed from the bench. they are grossly incompetent and a danger to our rule of law.

    Liked by 3 people

  10. IRock says:

    The new Attorney General is finally in place to direct the Administration’s court action.

    Liked by 3 people

  11. Root says:

    I am going to laugh if the White House declines the kind invitation to take any further part in the fiasco of the 9th circuit appellate proceedings and leaves them with the mess !

    Liked by 2 people

  12. Bacall says:

    Following on this AG Sessions will be able to test the capacity of his staff on this and other issues.

    Like

  13. Gail Alexandet says:

    ….and don’t forget…Obama, holder, bezos and his amazon legal team have their fingerprints on this treasonous action as well.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. Fred Freud says:

    A thought provoking essay. I hope it is correct. It certainly makes a logical argument.
    All Deplorables should now work to let the world around us know that the Democrats & their media cronies & protestors/rioters are responsible for so much as one scratch incurred as a result of the invaders.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. jmm says:

    those three judges should be charged as accessory before the fact when the next terrorist act occurs

    Liked by 2 people

  16. Vivian Hui says:

    Keep up the good job President Trump

    Liked by 1 person

  17. David_B says:

    Exact same reason the Republicans should never have run on repealing Obamacare. The democrats where always going to blame deaths on them when they did, and there would be plenty of fake news blaming them once they make any changes. What they should have done is just slowly taken it apart piece by piece without fanfare.

    Like

    • Nobody of Import says:

      What in the f*ck does that have to do with this discussion?

      Nothing.

      And the reality is that there’s MORE uninsured than insured under PPACA- which is why I think you’re full of shite. Take it elsewhere.

      Like

  18. Eddy Breyne says:

    Sundance – Your analysis is correct that this is a political victory masquerading as a loss. However, 800 people from those 7 countries have already entered the U.S. since February 4 and more are coming every day, with only UN vetting (which is to say no vetting at all). So unless they enact some mechanism to stop this accelerated flow quickly, we are less secure than before the Executive Order. (For your info I am totally in favor of the end goal of Extreme Vetting.)

    On the current action of the 9th Circus, am I wrong to think that the Administration has very little to lose politically (only some months of blame pointing to the Lib-tarts) ? If the 9th Circus ‘en banc’ accepts the decision of its 3 ‘so called judges’, nothing changes. If it reverses the 3, it gives the president the win and the plaintiffs the opportunity to appeal to the Supreme Court. Justice Kennedy may decide to reject the appeal and Trump is left with the 9th circus victory. Or if Justice Kennedy accepts the accelerated appeal and SCOTUS votes 4-4, we end up with the same result. The only down side is if Kennedy were to vote with the 4 progressist justices.

    I agree with you that the best thing is not to give the 9th circus the chance to correct themselves and to let them and the lib-tarts ‘mijoter’ in their craziness but I do not see much down side in the alternative.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Great article and insight Sundance! As we move along in this “issue” of those fighting Trump in placing a moratorium on the 7 terrorist states, what the media narrative tries to spew is always so quite different than REALITY and the ensuing fights and misinformation/disinformation and unconstitutional proceedings from corrupt judges. We always know that Trump has a master plan leagues ahead of any of their efforts.

    Especially excellent is this paragraph that Sundance points out, like the child who declared “the king is naked,” all their wasted efforts of trying to stop Trump are null and void, because as Sundance said in his article on this thread:
    “President Trump never really needed the majority parts of the executive order to carry out the security agenda. However, using the XO provided a highly public approach toward showing the American electorate he was fulfilling a campaign security promise. Tightening the visa approval process and executing “extreme vetting” doesn’t require anything except a policy and procedural change.

    “If President Trump does nothing, the underlying challenges to the Executive Order continue forward in the courts, while he gets his SCOTUS pick -Gorsuch- on the bench. If he so chooses, the DOJ can eventually bring the case to the Supreme Court, where almost everyone admits the Ninth Circuit and Judge Robarts decision will be overturned and all of the protestation from the left will have been for naught.”



    #Grinning
    #MAGA
    #iLOVEu
    #GodIsWithUs
    #KeepingMyPromisesToAmerica

    Liked by 1 person

  20. Sam Cooke says:

    Trump shouldn’t appeal the decision? Because then when terrorists kill Americans here it will be the 9th Circuits fault? That’s repugnant, let’s not become Democrats. The policy of exclusion is sound and he ought to insist on it because it protects lives. Period. And if he is lawlessly blocked by the judiciary, he ought to defy them and enforce the ban anyway. The court system in this country has gone unchecked and unbalanced for far too long.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Susan says:

      It is more complicated than that. Trump risks setting binding legal precedent that goes contrary to established law. If the DOJ appeals the decision to the US Supreme Court and the US Supreme Court rules 4-4, then the decision of the 9th Circuit Court will have been upheld and legal precedent that could not be overturned will have been set.

      I am not sure that would happen (i.e., a 4-4 US Supreme Ct decision), but the 9th Circuit should never have ruled the way it did in the first place. If the case were appealed to the US Supreme Court, the 9th Circuit decision should be overturned 8-0. But we are no longer in the realm of what should happen; we are in the realm of judicial lottery.

      For the 9th Circuit to take the case of its own accord or on its own motion without any intervention by the parties is highly unusual. I think someone on the 9th Circuit realizes that the three judge panel screwed up big-time (high profile embarrassment). If I were a gambler, I bet the en banc panel would find a creative way to undo whats been done.

      But from Trump’s vantage point, it would be just as easy to start over with a new Executive Order. Let the ruling stand as a testament of the 9th Circuit’s shame.

      Like

  21. charles says:

    I love the way you reported (framed) this analysis, Sundance. You are gifted and American patriots are blessed to have you
    on the side of we the people.

    Liked by 1 person

  22. The deplorable clayusmcret says:

    They’re stalling, trying to keep the administration tied up focusing on the 9th Circus instead of moving forward with another EO.

    Like

  23. James O'Malley says:

    Another thing to consider: the Ninth and the Democrats are scared of this going to SCOTUS, because that would set a precedent they don’t want set.

    Like

  24. Really says:

    Even if no terrorists came into the Country ( unlikely ) why would Dems want to line up with
    refugees that believe in….female mutilations…honor killings…arranged marriages…anti lgbtqxyz and everything they claim to be against!

    Liked by 1 person

  25. Pashta says:

    Trump is likely going to just issue a new Executive Order instead.

    Like

  26. JCscuba says:

    This was was an amazing piece, great job, taking it to my site for further exposure, Thanks, J.C.

    Like

  27. D3F1ANT says:

    9th C. is just a gaggle of activists. My Lord…there should be a Federal review or something of these clowns.

    Like

  28. Litterb ug says:

    So this is what Trump refers to as the art of the deal. He definitely did out do them. Trump definitely knows which battle to fight and which one not to fight or leave alone. He pick a issue that is clearly his to do under the authority of the US Constitution.for an American President. He step to one side and let them bang headlong into it and then he go back to doing what he suppose to be doing and leave the 9th circus court out hanging like a bunch of fools they are for the world to see.

    Like

  29. Bill says:

    Trump is turning me gay. I’ve never loved a man like this before.

    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