Today the 9th circuit court of appeals will hear the claim by trump that his immigration ban is legal and valid. It should be a stretch to make it since it is neither. Either through discrimination, equal protection, due process or separation of church and state, http://www.newsweek.com/opponents-best-legal-arguments-against-trump-immigration-ban-551934 this ban is wholly unconstitutional. Of course this is just my reading of it and surely trump and his cronies are going to use executive privilege as their remedy. What the court decides however will be subject to interpretation by the Supreme Court where no doubt this is heading regardless of the ruling from the 9th circuit.
That we have an executive that wants to deny folks from entering our country after having been legally and substantially vetted is to me a crime or at least a violation like the federal judge in Seattle determined. That the new executive does not recognize and has actually alleviated safeguards from home grown terrorists is baffling in light of this ban. We have had more problems with extremism in our own backyard than we have had imported from overseas. Regardless, taking this reality into view with the unconstitutional discriminatory acts within the ban, the argument can be made that the logic of the ban is not based upon any factual premise.
Our judiciary needs to be objective here and apply logic to the protections we have safeguarded in our constitution. No amount of bullying or false bravado should prevail when the core of our democracy is being challenged. The result we get today should affirm the federal court's judgement and then let the trumps move this illegal ban up to the Supreme court. At worst the ban will be split ideologically 4-4 with the Supreme's and by that the 9th Circuit's judgement will prevail. At best the Supreme's will decide on a 5-3 or better affirmation that the ban is unconstitutional and put it in it's grave.
That we have an executive that wants to deny folks from entering our country after having been legally and substantially vetted is to me a crime or at least a violation like the federal judge in Seattle determined. That the new executive does not recognize and has actually alleviated safeguards from home grown terrorists is baffling in light of this ban. We have had more problems with extremism in our own backyard than we have had imported from overseas. Regardless, taking this reality into view with the unconstitutional discriminatory acts within the ban, the argument can be made that the logic of the ban is not based upon any factual premise.
Our judiciary needs to be objective here and apply logic to the protections we have safeguarded in our constitution. No amount of bullying or false bravado should prevail when the core of our democracy is being challenged. The result we get today should affirm the federal court's judgement and then let the trumps move this illegal ban up to the Supreme court. At worst the ban will be split ideologically 4-4 with the Supreme's and by that the 9th Circuit's judgement will prevail. At best the Supreme's will decide on a 5-3 or better affirmation that the ban is unconstitutional and put it in it's grave.
No comments:
Post a Comment