Striking Down New Travel Ban, Court Cites Trump Adviser's Blithering On Fox News
March 16, 2017 12:16 am
Senior presidential advisor Stephen Millers February 21 admission of intent on Fox News has ensnared President Donald Trumps proposed Muslim ban in its second attempted rollout.
The Trump administrations first version of the likely unconstitutional Muslim ban was previously blocked by multiple federal judges, and one of the decisions was already unanimously upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. The 9th Circuit court noted that Trump and his supporters previous statements expressing their intent to discriminate on the basis of religion and ban Muslim immigration can be used in proceedings to prove the policys unconstitutionality.
For example, Trump advisor Rudy Giuliani admitted to Fox News that after Trump announced the original Muslim ban the then-presidential candidate asked Giuliani to show him the right way to do it legally.
On March 6, Trump enacted a slightly altered version of the first Muslim ban, hoping to avoid judicial concerns with the possible unconstitutionality of the original. This new Muslim Ban 2.0 was also immediately challenged and on March 15, the U.S. District Court for the District of Hawaii issued a temporary restraining order on the ban.
more
http://www.nationalmemo.com/striking-down-new-travel-ban
procon
(15,805 posts)They've been isolated in their far right bubble for so long that they think everyone is as batshit crazy as they are. They keep trying to disguise their Muslim ban, but then they go on camera and brag about how clever and ingenious they are for fooling all the chumps. Last night, Trump even called his last Muslim ban a "watered down version of the first one", and the federal Judges aren't buying it. Trump is so stupid he hasn't figured out that the fault is his.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)As the court explained, These plainly-worded statements, made in the months leading up to and contemporaneous with the signing of the Executive Order, and, in many cases, made by the Executive himself, betray the Executive Orders stated secular purpose. Any reasonable, objective observer would conclude, as does the Court for purposes of the instant Motion for TRO, that the stated secular purpose of the Executive Order is, at the very least, secondary to a religious objective of temporarily suspending the entry of Muslims.