Addressing American sheriffs at the White House today, President Donald Trump advocated
his Executive Order restricting travel from (Obama-identified) countries whose people are likely to be a threat. Meanwhile Americans await the Ninth Circuit’s ruling on Judge Robarts’ lawless temporary restraining order freezing Trump’s order.
Trump represented himself in Washington v. Trump
simply by reading aloud the statute that grants him power to issue his order
– limited in time and scope as it is:
INA §212(f) Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. [Emphasis added]
You don’t have to be a lawyer to get this; any good high school student – even a bad high school student! – can understand it, argues President Trump.
Trump’s right. He’s not the first president to dot his. Memorably, President Carter excluded Iranians – including legally resident – during the hostage crisis. Mainstream politicians and media didn’t oppose Carter with fury
, as they do Trump. And Carter’s ban, perforce, excluded Muslims almost exclusively…
Simple as this is, it was frustrating to listen to Ninth Circuit judges indulging in political questioning. Obama-appointee Michelle Friedland even insinuated this is really a Muslim ban based on things Trump said as a candidate
, diving deliberately down a judicially irrelevant political rabbit-hole. GW Bush-appointee Richard Clifton didn’t buy that, but federal judges’ inclination to legislate their desires from the bench was evident.
Defending Trump’s order, DOJ’s August Flentje rightly
said Trump’s risk assessment is a “national security judgment entrusted to the political branches of government.” Just so. Judges should yield and let the President do his job.
If the Ninth Circuit rules against Trump, unelected judges will have legislated more border lawlessness—illegally and unconstitutionally. We’d have to trust the Supreme Court to vindicate the president’s power to secure our borders. Not a sure thing.
Too long have Americans tolerated judges’ usurping the legislative role the Constitution grants to Congress. As VDARE.com's Peter Brimelow has repeatedly argued
, if judges are going to act like elected legislators, they should face elections i.e. constitutionally sanctioned impeachment by Congress. Impeachment is
a check on overreaching judges, not just corrupt ones
About that, Peter is right.
And about his powers and the borders, so is Trump!