Federal judges invent a new legal
standard where all legal precedent can be discarded to resist President
Trump.
The Fourth Circuit Court
of Appeals invented a new legal standard
granting Muslims unlimited power over national security in their
decision to maintain the injunction against President Trump’s travel
ban executive order
(via
Breitbart).
The 10 judges in the majority upheld the decision of district courts
that the executive order violated the Fourth Amendment on the basis of
campaign rhetoric, inventing a new legal standard.
The order, called Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry,
“speaks with vague words of national security, but in context drips
with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination” ruled the
activist judges.
The court’s decision relies on a newly created legal standard that has
no basis in previous Supreme Court decisions. The new standard allows
plaintiffs to block neutral government actions on the basis of the
campaign or private statements.
“In looking behind the face of the government’s action for facts to
show the alleged bad faith… the majority grants itself the power to
conduct an extratextual search for evidence suggesting bad faith, which
is exactly what three Supreme Court opinions have prohibited,” wrote
Judge Niemeyer in the dissent.
“The majority, now for the first time, rejects these holdings in favor
of its politically desired outcome,” continues Judge Niemeyer, who was
joined by just two other judges.
However, in a 10-3 ruling the majority have their way, and the decision
will surely be brought before the Supreme Court where the matter will
be settled once and for all.
The
court’s decision relies on a newly created legal standard that has no
basis in previous Supreme Court decisions. The new standard allows
plaintiffs to block neutral government actions on the basis of the
campaign or private statements.
The activists’ decision is dangerous, not just for establishing a new
legal standard that will have a chilling effect on speech, but the
ruling will also allow Muslim plaintiffs to petition the courts to
block just about any government action that predominantly affects
Muslim-majority countries.
Further, the court creates a new standard, where the feelings of a
plaintiff can grant standing before a court. The Muslim plaintiff
attempting to block the executive order was not affected by the travel
ban directly, but claims the order increases hostilities towards
Muslim-Americans.
Essentially, the progressive activist judges are creating a new legal
standard where the president can be blocked from acting in the name of
national security if a member of a minority group finds the action
offensive.
If this decision is upheld by the Supreme Court, it will effectively
block President Trump from taking any action against Muslim countries
due to statements he made during the campaign offering unlimited
protection to terrorist countries.
