A federal appeals court in Virginia is taking a second look at President Trump’s executive order temporarily banning immigration from six Middle Eastern countries and halting refugee resettlement for a 90-day period. The order, which was blocked in both its first and second incarnations, is only now getting a proper judicial review from a higher court. The outcome could prove to be a significant test of the Trump administration’s authority as there is no reasonable legal argument to be made regarding the order’s unconstitutionality. The power to preside over national security resides with the executive branch, and this is the first time in modern history that this authority has been questioned.
No judge or lawyer with an ounce of integrity would give those original decisions anything more than a hearty laugh. They were so obviously decided on the basis of liberal ideology that the decisions themselves read like bad fan fiction. Like a protester’s idea of what a legal ruling should look like. They had no basis in law and no basis in fact. That the Trump administration is even being forced to appeal to a higher court is a joke. The judges who rendered the stays should be ashamed of themselves, if not disbarred.
The core of the issue is whether or not the executive order violates the First Amendment. In other words, did the Trump administration single out a particular faith unconstitutionally when devising this order? And the answer, which MUST only be derived from the text of the order itself, is unambiguously no. If this was a “Muslim ban,” as Trump originally proposed on the campaign trail, it might be a different story. But it wasn’t. And the fact that the countries involved are “majority-Muslim” should make no difference whatsoever. The court isn’t supposed to be a guessing game. Judges are supposed to render decisions based on what’s in front of them – not what pundits are saying on MSNBC.
“Although plaintiffs and others may believe that the national-security risk is insufficient to warrant entry suspension,” argued the Justice Department, “the President is entitled and obligated by the Constitution and Acts of Congress to weigh those risks himself and to strike a different balance than his predecessors if he deems it appropriate to protect national security.”
The 4th Circuit in Virginia and the 9th Circuit on the West Coast will undergo reviews of the case nearly simultaneously; if they arrive at divided rulings, the case will almost certainly go to the Supreme Court for its conclusion.
We sorely pray that sanity prevails at that point, if not before. Otherwise we have a court system that has been wholly swallowed by American liberalism, putting our national security and our very future as a nation in grave danger.