Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
Oh, right. They're all for "following the letter of the law" - only so long as it's a law with which they happen to agree...
Watched video of Judge Robart speaking from the bench today and I wasn't just excited by his ruling, but also—and if you can indulge me on this tangent for a minute, it's something I've only just had enough time outside the state to become acutely aware of—the judge's mega Seattle accent.
Under U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 4, Congress has the power to pass immigration laws, and in the Immigration and Naturalization Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f), Congress delegated power to the President to "suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants." President Trump has the statutory and constitutional power to exclude aliens from countries he deems a threat.
President Trump's power to ban is not constrained by the Fifth or Fourteenth Amendments. The Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses protect only current holders of visas or other documents; they do not protect new seekers.
The Establishment of Religion Clause of the First Amendment is also unlikely to constrain President Trump. Under the Lemon test, a facially neutral government action whose effect privileges certain religious practices is nonetheless permissible so long as the action has a primarily secular purpose. If President Trump can show that the seven banned countries do indeed have serious problems with terrorism, his executive order will pass the Lemon test and will not be barred by the First Amendment. Because each of the seven countries is either a state sponsor of terror or suffering from widespread terrorism, President Trump will have an easy case to make.
The President's power in this arena is strong. The likely truth that he is motivated by bigotry will not necessarily render his actions illegal. Opponents of the President should expect defeat on this issue and will need to look to some other issue on which to fight him.
@6 Despite what I actually learned in school there, EVERYONE has an accent. It can be subtle, but Seattle has some unique pronunciations and cadences.
And yet, I still say "aygs."
To state the obvious: personalized attacks on a judge for making a ruling that even if you don't like it was predicted as a likely outcome of the city system -- this is bullshit. In the technical sense: they don't care about true or false, they're going purely for effect. They lather up the nasty part of their base, and they place extra-legal pressure from the executive branch onto the judicial.
Off topic but…
I sincerely hope that you're wrong, but just in case you are not wrong, thank you for painting yourself as a target, hopefully that may draw fire away from more sincere dissidents. Kudos to you for being a standup martyr of the highest caliber, I intend to respect and honor the memory of your diversionary tactics by fulfilling your wish that you be promptly forgotten.
Listen to what your canine master is telling you, dogs are widely recognized for their undistracted and thoughtful deliberations and furthermore ...SQUIRREL!!!