Sunday, February 5, 2017

Both Republican and Democrat establishments desperately want open borders, so they're hoping the Seattle judge will win

2/4/17,  "DHS and President Trump Respond To Activist Washington State Ruling on Visa Restrictions," tcth, sundance 

"No single issue better reflects the politicized UniParty than immigration. In all things related to legal or illegal entry into the United States the Democrats and big government Republicans are united in their efforts to create a borderless America; expect little support for President Trump from the GOPe side of the aisle. 

Two federal judges, Boston (Mass) and Seattle (WA), released two completely different opinions on the legality of President Trump’s temporary halt on Visa approvals from seven identified countries of concern. The Boston ruling by Federal Judge Gorton upholds the executive authority and supports President Trump.  The Seattle ruling by Federal Judge Robart halts the executive action.

Due to Judge Robart’s refusal to accept prior case law and supreme court rulings, and as an outcome of his inability to cite existing law to support his decision (READ HERE), it is generally believed the Seattle ruling will be “stayed”. The sum total of Robart’s ruling is merely seven pages of activist catch phrases, judicial activism, with no legal guiding citation.

Conversely, Judge Gorton firmly establishes his decision (READ HERE)  -to the benefit of the Executive Order- on prior precedent and current established judicial interpretations, and it is believed Gorton’s decision will be more in line with the final outcome of the challenges. Gorton’s 21 page ruling contains 51 legal citations to precedent and existing case law which guides his decision.

A good summary of why President Trump will likely win is HERE....

"[…] Here is where the Boston judge and the Seattle judge appeared to disagree. According to reports of what was said at oral argument in Seattle, the Seattle judge believes rational basis review requires the law-making branches of government “prove” with “facts” presented in court that their position is the correct one. 

As the Boston judge noted, this interpretation of the law — inviting the judicial branch to replace the elected branches of government — is directly contrary to precedent. This is why the Seattle judge’s opinion is likely to lose out ultimately, and Trump’s will prevail.  (read more)"


Comment: I still don't understand. Two judges of equal rank made decisions on the same day. One decision is now the law of the land and the other is meaningless. Open borders, of course, formalizes the status of US taxpayers as global slaves.


No comments: