Trump challenged to fight the courts

if(typeof(jQuery)==”function”){(function($){$.fn.fitVids=function(){}})(jQuery)};
jwplayer(‘jwplayer_SLA5ZOB2_pszPfxYQ_div’).setup(
{“playlist”:”http://content.jwplatform.com/jw6/SLA5ZOB2.xml”}
);

Donald Trump was elected to “drain the swamp.”

But since taking office, he’s been confronted by the Deep State, a hostile media and an unhinged Democratic Party.

The biggest problem, however, is his opponents in the court system.

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld a lower-court ruling that blocked the Trump administration from fulfilling a campaign promise to impose a temporary ban on travel and migration from Muslim nations linked to terrorism. The ban would have prevented new visas from being issued for people from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

The vote was 10-3. All 10 judges who voted against Trump’s immigration ban were appointed by Democrats; all three that defended Trump’s ban were appointed by Republicans.

The majority’s opinion denounced “an executive order that in text speaks with vague words of national security, but in context drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination.”

The executive order does not ban anyone on account of religion but instead identifies specific countries that were also identified by the Obama administration as hosts of terrorism. However, the court used Trump and his advisers’ statements about a “Muslim ban” during the campaign to rule the executive order unconstitutional.

Conservative analyst Daniel Horowitz slams such judicial activism in his book “Stolen Sovereignty.” The book was written before the election, and Horowitz said he never could have anticipated the courts would go so far so fast.

“We’re at a turning point now,” said Horowitz. “The courts are now explicitly political and essentially admitting they are political. This latest decision really had nothing to do with ‘law,’ properly understood. It didn’t even focus on the text of the executive order. Instead, the judges simply decided they didn’t like the Trump administration’s motivations and took it upon themselves to throw out the order.”

In a column urging President Trump to ignore the court’s ruling, Horowitz mocked the idea courts have an unchallengeable power to bind the entire country to whatever policies they decide to implement.

“If Rep. Louie Gohmert or Sen. Rand Paul were to don black robes tomorrow and issue judicial orders on flagrantly political issues, would we expect the other branches of government to treat them as the final law of the land – binding over the other two branches of government – more so than when they were sitting in their respective legislative chambers?” Horowitz asked rhetorically.

“The other branches, especially if controlled by Democrats, would discard their judicial ‘opinions’ immediately.”

Yet, as Horowitz observes, judges, including in lower courts, now have the final say over national sovereignty, immigration and national security. If such a situation is allowed to persist, claims Horowitz, elections, the Constitution and the mechanisms of the republic itself are completely pointless, because judges simply invent rationales to push through whatever policies they want.

Who REALLY rules America? Stand up against the unelected tyrants in black. Find out how in “Stolen Sovereignty: How to Stop Unelected Judges From Transforming America.” Available now at the WND Superstore!

In the short term, Horowitz expects the case to go to the Supreme Court. But victory is not certain even there.

“The sad thing is this should be 9-0, but there is a guarantee of four justices who will side with the Democrat political outcome, even if it runs contrary to law,” Horowitz said. “[Justice] Kennedy has been very wishy-washy on sovereignty cases, and [Chief Justice] Roberts has shown he is unreliable on some immigration cases. It’s possible it could be upheld or maybe only in part.”

However, even if the Trump administration wins its court case, Horowitz says the president will have suffered a larger defeat.

“Either way, because it will be a very narrow win, it accepts most of the premise that there is an establishment clause right to immigrate,” Horowitz charged. “We would have lost 90 percent of the plenary power doctrine upheld by over 100 years of case law, which was considered until now the most settled area of law by respected justices like Robert Jackson and Antonin Scalia. They will come back next time using this case as the new floor for judicial supervision of immigration policy, and like every other case, will only move further away from sovereignty with the ever-evolving legal ratchet.”

The consequences, warned Horowitz, are nothing less than existential.

“Right now, the lower courts are essentially taking the legal doctrine of ‘disparate impact’ and applying it to the entire world,” Horowitz explained. “‘Disparate impact’ means if a law affects different groups at different rates, it is automatically illegitimate somehow. So if you implement a law that criminalizes something and one ethnic group ends up being arrested more because it commits more crimes, someone could conceivably make a claim saying the law needs to be thrown out because it is insufficiently egalitarian.

“Similarly, here what the courts are saying is that we can’t take anti-terrorism measures which disproportionately affect Muslims because it isn’t egalitarian enough. Of course, the fact is most of the terrorist threats in the world today come from radical Muslims. Any anti-terrorism measure, even if it never mentions Muslims, is going to disproportionately affect them!

What do YOU think? Is it time to start impeaching activist judges? Sound off in today’s WND poll.

“What’s even more insane is that the lower courts are now giving constitutional protections to every single Muslim on the planet. Essentially, the courts are saying the United States of America does not have the right to control who comes to this country if there is any kind of differential impact between groups.

“It’s pure insanity. It makes the idea of this country ruling itself, or even existing as a country at all, into an obscene joke.”

Horowitz said there is a simple solution. Congress, which has power over courts, can simply remove their jurisdiction over immigration and sovereignty issues by passing legislation. Of course, as he ruefully noted, the Republican Congress is showing its characteristic cowardice and inaction.

“No one is stepping up,” he said. “That’s why it is so important for President Trump to step up to the plate.”

Horowitz offered specific actions President Trump should undertake if he wants to retake power in Washington and restore sovereignty to the American people.

“President Trump should give a televised address from the Oval Office outlining his response to the growing threat of homegrown terrorism and demanding action from Congress to deal with the courts,” Horowitz urged.

He said Trump should tell Congress to:

  • Block funding for all refugees and visas from the Middle East for the remainder of the fiscal year. “There’s no way a court can put an injunction on a lack of congressional funding,” Horowitz said. “This is why it was such a betrayal for Trump to have signed the last budget bill when it didn’t defund refugees but defunded the border fence.”
  • Further enforce provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act that strip the courts of jurisdiction to adjudicate rejections of visas.
  • Pass a supplemental funding bill for the border wall and the construction of a visa exit-entry tracking system, a goal Democrats officially support and that has been passed by Congress numerous times since 1996.

Horowitz said President Trump has waited long enough to show the fighting spirit Americans thought they were getting when they elected him.

“President Trump likes to appeal to Andrew Jackson,” said Horowitz. “Well, whatever else you want to say about him, Andrew Jackson didn’t put up with judicial supremacism.

“President Trump needs to stop caving to the courts and fight to reclaim American sovereignty. If he doesn’t have the courage to do it, they aren’t going to let him accomplish anything. And if someone doesn’t fight them soon, then we should stop pretending we govern ourselves, and just admit we are ruled by unelected judges.”

Who REALLY rules America? Stand up against the unelected tyrants in black. Find out how in “Stolen Sovereignty: How to Stop Unelected Judges From Transforming America.” Available now at the WND Superstore!

Trump challenged to fight the courts
Source: WND