President Trump tried to issue a ninety day travel ban to stop the flow of people from nations deemed to be hotspots of terrorism until better vetting procedures could be implemented. All this was planned out to make sure America was not placing itself at risk for any terrorist attacks.
Then, liberal legislate-from-the-bench judges took over and issued an injunction against the travel ban, ruling it was intended to discriminate against the adherents of Islam as a race and therefore was not legal.
An appeals court has now determined the injunction was too broad in scope and forced Judge Derrick Watson to revise it. Finally, the beginning of liberal judges being put into their place. This is a win for the president!
The Daily Caller has more:
A federal judge in Hawaii on Monday narrowed the scope of an injunction he issued in March, after an appeals court concluded his initial order was too broad.
U.S. District Court Judge Derrick Watson’s March order prohibited the Departments of State and Homeland Security from reviewing federal vetting procedures and preparing reports recommending additional security measures for migrant and refugee entry. Per his new order, State and DHS may begin those reviews, provided they “do not burden individuals outside of the executive branch of the federal government.”
Watson’s order put the administration in something of a bind — the government’s stated rationale for interrupting migrant entry for 90 days was to assess the strength of its vetting processes. The administration claims this assessment is essential for the nation’s continued security. Critics charged that the government was not being forthright about the order’s true objectives, as it had not yet conducted these “vital” policy reviews — but it was Watson’s order that prohibited them from doing so in the first place.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that the injunction was overly broad last week.
The revised injunction makes it slightly less likely the Supreme Court will intervene to amend the injunction, as this dimension of Watson’s ruling was the most obvious error of law. The justices could announce as soon as Thursday whether they will review lower court rulings barring the order’s enforcement.
Should the high court agree to review the case, the government may now be asked about its progress on the vetting assessment in judicial proceedings, creating an additional complication for their defense of the order.
Liberal judges are probably thinking that if they don’t amend the original ruling to allow for reviewing and adjusting of vetting procedures, the Supreme Court will overrule them altogether, which would be a huge victory for Trump and an equally huge loss for the bleeding heart liberals!
At this point, refugees coming from the countries listed by former President Obama as terrorist hotspots are just as likely to be ISIS terrorists as they are seekers of refuge from terrorism. We definitely need a mechanism in place to weed out those threats before they get here, or America will soon resemble France, Germany, and the UK suffering under the effects of rampant Muslim violence.
Trump is right and we need to let him do what needs to be done! Let’s hope that the Supreme Court will still review this case, after seeing these circuit judges scramble to stop the president at every stop.
Source: The Daily Caller