Trump Abhors: Rule of Law; Law & Order; Truth & Justice; Due Process; Equal Protection

U.S Court System (State and Federal)

Two states say allowing “travel ban would unleash chaos again.”

WASHINGTON (AP) – Lawyers for Washington state and Minnesota have told a federal appellate court that restoring President Donald Trump's ban on refugees and travelers from seven predominantly Muslim countries “unleash chaos again.”

The filing with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco came early Monday after the White House said it expected the federal courts to reinstate the ban in place by Judge Robart in the Seattle District Court’s ruling that put a temporary hold on the ban nationwide. Then Trump challenged that ruling and even referred to Judge Robart as “that so-called Judge.” At that point, Washington and Minnesota filed with the Appeals Court that upheld that SF ruling saying in part that a nationwide temporary restraining order was appropriate. The states contend that the “ruling would reinstitute harms, separate families, strand college and university students and faculty, and bar necessary travel.”

John Kerry and Madeleine Albright, former secretaries of state, along with former national security officials under President Barack Obama have all said Trump's ban would disrupt lives and cripple U.S. counter-terrorism partnerships around the world without making the nation safer, adding: “It will aid ISIL's propaganda effort and serve its recruitment message by feeding into the narrative that the United States is at war with Islam” (as part of the 6-page declaration filed in court), plus: “Blanket bans of certain countries or classes of people are beneath the dignity of the nation and Constitution that we each took oaths to protect.”

Also, the high-tech industry argued against the ban, contending it would harm their companies by making it more difficult to recruit employees. Tech giants like Apple and Google, along with Uber, also filed arguments with the court.

The next opportunity for Trump's team to argue in favor of the ban will come in the form of a response to the Washington state and Minnesota filings. The 9th Circuit ordered the Justice Department to file its briefs by 6 p.m. EST Monday. It had already turned down a Justice request to set aside immediately a Seattle judge's ruling that put a temporary hold on the ban nationwide.

Trump renewed his Twitter attacks against Judge Robart saying: “Just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril. If something happens blame him and court system. People pouring in. Bad!”

He followed with another tweet saying he had instructed the Homeland Security Department to check people coming into the country but that “the courts are making the job very difficult!”

The government had told the appeals court that the president alone has the power to decide who can enter or stay in the United States, an assertion that appeared to invoke the wider battle to come over illegal immigration.

Congress “vests complete discretion” in the president to impose conditions on entry of foreigners to the United States, and that power is “largely immune from judicial control,” according to the court filing.

MY FOOT NOTE TO THAT LINE OF BS: Trump has realize that the Constitution channels the presidency toward protecting the nation from foreign threats, while cooperating with Congress on matters at home and as a matter of fact, even as CINC, Trump does not have the constitutional authority to order the construction of a border wall, nor does he have the power to terminate trade deals negotiated by Congress, like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) without due legislative processes. 

Then Trump is ignorant about any EO imposing a temporary ban on nationals from seven predominantly Muslim countries entering the United States falls flat with the law since such orders seek “Muslim ban and that violates the Constitution's protection for freedom of religion and the prohibition on the state establishment of religion.”

Trump is on very thin ice and taking the country towards a major world-wide and certainly domestic constitutional crisis.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, predicted the appeals court would not have the last word, adding: “I have no doubt that it will go to the Supreme Court, and probably some judgments will be made whether this president has exceed his authority or not.”

FYI: In his ruling, Judge Robart said “[…] it was not the court's job to create policy or judge the wisdom of any particular policy promoted by the other two branches, but instead to make sure that an action taken by the government comports with our country's laws.” Amen, Judge Robart, Amen…!!!

Finally, the Trump T-4 attacks (Trump’s Terrible Twitter Tactics) attacks Judge Robart on a very personal level that is truly un-presidential. The Judge was appointed by President George W. Bush in 2004 (and he is considered to be a mainstream Republican). For example, Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) said: “We don't have so-called judges and we don't have so-called senators, or we don't have so-called presidents. We have people from three different branches of government who take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.” Amen to that, too. 

Old cliché sign on the Oval Office:  SAD...!!!