A Hawaiian federal judge who put a stop to President Trump’s revised executive order on banning immigrants from six terrorist sponsoring Muslim nations from traveling to the United States has just extended the ban.
The legal motivation for the ban’s freeze is entirely false!
The Associated Press (AP) reports on March 30 that U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson has eagerly and blindly inflated the prospective damage the ban would have done to just one man, an imam in Honolulu worried about his mother-in-law not being able to travel from Syria.
Really? That’s the issue at hand? How is it that rights artificially grafted onto the legal status of a FOREIGNER from a terrorist nation hold more legal weight than the safety of Americans?
By all accounts the Justice Department attorney should have laughed in the face of Judge Watson. In a telephone conference with the activist and idiotic judge, the government’s lawyer Chad Readler implored that since “Hawaii hasn’t shown how it is harmed by various provisions, including one that would suspend the nation’s refugee program”, the ruling was groundless.
Even AP concurred, but buried that observation way down in its piece where it said, “It’s not clear how Watson’s ruling will affect the mother-in-law’s ability to obtain a visa.”
Let me get this straight. There is not only no smoke but no fire and a federal judge is yelling out “Inferno!”
Is this not a shameless abdication of legal objectivity? What do you think?