A Flawed Restraining of a Flawed Order

[Draggingtree]

Hoover Institute :

A Flawed Restraining of a Flawed Order

by Michael McConnell

Friday, February 10, 2017

 

Yesterday a unanimous panel of the Ninth Circuit issued an order and a brief opinion in State of Washington v. Trump, a challenge to the legality of President Trump’s executive order imposing a temporary moratorium on travel visas from seven designated countries – all of them countries racked by civil war and virtual anarchy. Trump detractors were elated. I can scarcely remember a lower court opinion so eagerly anticipated or so enthusiastically received. (By comparison, litigation brought by 25 states over President Obama’s far more significant immigration order barely received any coverage or attention at all, when argued and decided in the lower courts.)

 

Much of the interest, and hysteria, was predicated on a demonstrably false characterization of the Order as a “Muslim ban.” President Trump has only himself to blame for that misunderstanding, since he called for such a ban on the campaign trail and his Administration offered almost no explanation of the narrow scope or the justification for the Order. It was almost as if the Administration hoped to set off a hysterical and uninformed debate, or to throw the immigrant and refugee community into a state of fear and uncertainty. I cannot believe that to be true, but sometimes carelessness and haste have the same effect that malice would.

 

[Draggingtree]

2/10/2017

Michael McConnell’s Criticism of the Ninth Circuit Decision on Trump’s Immigration Order

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 9:30 pm

 

Stanford law professor and former federal appeals court judge Michael McConnell has a piece at Hoover.org that criticizes the Ninth Circuit decision on Trump’s executive order. The piece is titled A Flawed Restraining of a Flawed Order.

 

McConnell’s piece is notable not only for what it says, but also what it doesn’t say . . . and for what it concedes.

 

Before getting to the legal analysis, McConnell makes this observation:

 

Much of the interest, and hysteria, was predicated on a demonstrably false characterization of the Order as a “Muslim ban.” President Trump has only himself to blame for that misunderstanding, since he called for such a ban on the campaign trail and his Administration offered almost no explanation of the narrow scope or the justification for the Order. It was almost as if the Administration hoped to set off a hysterical and uninformed debate, or to throw the immigrant and refugee community into a state of fear and uncertainty. I cannot believe that to be true, but sometimes carelessness and haste have the same effect that malice would.

http://patterico.com/2017/02/10/michael-mcconnells-criticism-of-the-ninth-circuit-decision-on-trumps-immigration-order/

[Draggingtree]

 

Whistling Past the Graveyard

By Wm. P. Fitzhenry | February 10, 2017, 01:25pm

Whats missing inside the cacophonous white noise that daily emanates from both the Democratic Party and the MSM?

 

One of the more famous Sherlock Holmes stories is “The Dog That Didn’t Bark”. A quick summation is that nobody heard the dog bark because he recognized the villain. There is a dog not barking now, and the silence is becoming deafening.

 

A quick google search on AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka, UAW President Dennis Williams, United Mine Workers President Cecil Roberts, or Teamsters President James Hoffa is quite educating. There are virtually no public statements in support of what was at one time the party they controlled.

 

The Universal Law of Cause and Effect and the Law of Unintended Consequences whereby immediate interest override long-term interest are equally duplicative when considering the plight of the blue collar worker and today’s socialist democratic party. http://theresurgent.com/whistling-past-the-graveyard/

[Valin]

Whistling Past the Graveyard

By Wm. P. Fitzhenry | February 10, 2017, 01:25pm

 

 

 

 

What the leaders of The Resistance don’t seem to understand is while progressive liberals hear their message one way, the blue collar worker hears something diametrically different.

 

 

In the late 70's (?) PBS aired a program about Unions. One comment that has always stayed with me was a comment by the head of the Steel Workers Union...(I paraphrase) "You have to remember there are union men and union workers. A union man is one who is dedicated to unionism a union worker joins because he wants the job. The vast majority of the members of unions are union workers."

[Draggingtree]

 

Whistling Past the Graveyard

By Wm. P. Fitzhenry | February 10, 2017, 01:25pm

 

 

 

 

What the leaders of The Resistance don’t seem to understand is while progressive liberals hear their message one way, the blue collar worker hears something diametrically different.

 

 

In the late 70's (?) PBS aired a program about Unions. One comment that has always stayed with me was a comment by the head of the Steel Workers Union...(I paraphrase) "You have to remember there are union men and union workers. A union man is one who is dedicated to unionism a union worker joins because he wants the job. The vast majority of the members of unions are union workers."

 

yep

[Draggingtree]

Ninth Circuit Court Now Demands It Be Protected From Itself…

Posted on February 10, 2017 by sundance

Oh, the winning… it’s often too funny. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is now independently, on its own impetus, requesting an internal vote on a full panel en banc hearing to review its own decision.

 

Additionally, the full ninth are asking the Trump administration to file an additional brief telling the court why the three member original appeals ruling authority was wrong. In essence, the smart judges know what wasn’t considered, and are now looking for an out.

 

You just can’t make this stuff up.

 

Prior to expanding the conversation, allow us to set the current stage with a few tweet optics:

[Draggingtree]

THE VULNERABILITIES IN THE NINTH CIRCUIT’S EXECUTIVE-ORDER DECISION

By Jeffrey Toobin February 10, 2017

 

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals delivered an extraordinary rebuke to President Trump yesterday. The politically diverse panel (two Democratic appointees, one Republican) rejected just about every argument put forth by the Justice Department and left intact a temporary restraining order that prevented Trump’s ballyhooed executive order on immigration from going into effect while a federal court in Seattle considers a challenge brought by the states of Washington and Minnesota. Trump’s political adversaries, starved for victories, celebrated.

 

But is the Ninth Circuit ruling correct on the law? And what are the prospects for the underlying case as it continues through the legal system toward an expected dénouement in the Supreme Court? Short answer: one can’t say for sure. But I think there are several vulnerabilities in the Ninth Circuit opinion that may help the Trump Administration pull this case out in the end.

 

Here are four areas of concern.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-vulnerabilities-in-the-ninth-circuits-executive-order-decision

[Draggingtree]

Why is Anyone Going along with the 9th Circuit COA’s Illegal Ruling?

Why are we going along with decisions made by judges that are—legally—not within their purview? Why are we continuing to follow rulings from rogue courts in our country that are illegal on their very face? Are judges a part of the “special’ class that was once reserved for corrupt politicians who operate beyond the law and get away with it? In this instance, NO judge has the authority to overturn the decision made by the President of the United States…not one.

 

The actions and decision from the 9th Circuit (and why it’s called the 9th Circus) Court of Appeals was patently illegal from its first cunning “review” of another illegal decision made by United States District Court Judge James Louis Robart. So, one illegal act (Judge Robart had no authority to make any decision to—let alone override—stay President Trump’s Executive Order on suspension of all immigrants from 7 Middle Eastern Terrorism hotbeds) from a local judge was exacerbated by, yet, another from a higher court. Note: I strongly assume this was the plan of the leftist Democrats and their leadership all along.

 

By Sher Zieve - Saturday, February 11, 2017 - Full Story

[Draggingtree]

Trump’s Court Battle in Perspective

by Roger Aronoff on February 10, 2017

 

Now that a federal appeals court panel has upheld the freeze on President Donald Trump’s executive order on refugees and immigration, he will likely have his first case before the U.S. Supreme Court in the not too distant future. This may have been an unforced error on the part of the President. While I believe it was wrong and counter-productive for President Trump to belittle the Washington state judge and suggest that even a “bad high school student” would understand the law, the media, in their hyper-hostility toward Trump, are demonstrating their complete double standard. Where was their criticism of Obama when he attacked and pressured the courts to rule in his favor, or condemned them after rulings went against him? The press was missing in action.

 

President Obama wasn’t shy about criticizing the courts. He did so during his 2010 State of the Union address where he criticized the Supreme Court’s ruling on Citizens United. “With all due deference to separation of powers,” said Obama, “last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that, I believe, will open the floodgates for special interests, including foreign corporations, to spend without limit in our elections.” Justice Samuel A. Alito made news by mouthing “Not true” in response to the president’s comments.

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/trumps-court-battle-in-perspective/

[Draggingtree]

THE NINTH CIRCUIT: DANGEROUSLY OUT OF ORDER

 

Black-robed politicians on the Left Coast handcuff Trump, keeping the borders wide open for terrorists.

Matthew Vadum February 10, 2017

[Valin]

Forward to 4:00 mark