Victory for Trump at Supreme Court — well, mostly it’s victory but…

The Supremes uphold Trump’s travel ban and then carve a hole in it big enough for a terrorist to drive a truck bomb through it.

Paul Mirengoff at Powerline:

…the Court’s action means that the Trump administration may impose a 90-day ban on travelers from Libya, Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen and a 120-day ban on all refugees entering the United States, with this exception: the ban “may not be enforced against foreign nationals who have a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States.”

The exception is far from trivial. It may not all that difficult for those desiring to enter the U.S. to assert a “credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States.” Indeed, would-be terrorists may well have such relationships.

Justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch dissented from the portion of the order imposing this exception. Justice Thomas’ opinion for the three made the obvious point that “today’s compromise will burden executive officials with the task of deciding — on peril of contempt — whether individuals from the six affected nations who wish to enter the United States have a sufficient connection to a person or entity in this country.” It will also likely produce “a flood of litigation until this case is finally resolved on the merits, as parties and courts struggle to determine what exactly constitutes a ‘bona fide relationship,’ who precisely has a ‘credible claim’ to that relationship, and whether the claimed relationship was formed ‘simply to avoid’ the executive order.”

The statute that allows the President to exclude any foreigner from entering the county does not provide any exception at all. The President has exclusive and unlimited power to ban any class of foreigner for good reason, bad reason or without any reason. I understand that the liberals don’t give a damn about the law but I don’t understand why Anthony Kennedy and John Roberts had become the weasel squad to join with them They could have done something radical, like following the rule of law. You can say they did follow the law only if you believe that the Supreme Court has the power to make the law. I don’t believe that and neither did James Madison.

I’m reading Justice Thomas’ dissenting opinion now.  I’ll write about it soon.

The court will hear arguments in October, today’s decision is essentially a grant of certiorari and a partial lifting of the injunctions of the lower “courts,” (scare quotes fully justified).

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Subscribe to Blog via Email


%d bloggers like this: