I wonder if the fact that they’re done essentially nothing on the supposed permanent regulations will come into the decision. It certainly does make it much harder to claim there’s an emergency of some kind.
The misadministration was supposed to do a 120 day study when the first EO was issued. Wonder if they’ve made any progress? The temporary ban was supposed to allow the study.
Wasn’t there a piece from one of the previous hearings where the govt attorney said they’d stopped all work because of the injunctions?
This is confusing. How many courts are going to hear this case? Because there is also a federal judge in Detroit who is demanding Ghouliani’s memo outlining his plan to ban “them Mooslims.”
I presume Comrade Cockholder was probably working on that yesterday while he “worked” at Trump National Golf Club in Virginia, where he shot a course record 35(!), ate an extra-well-done steak with plenty of ketchup, had cake and two scoops of ice cream, took a nap, and billed taxpayers $1.5 million for his service to the country.
Oh, yeah, and: Meetings!
Hmmm. Cheetolini CockHolster. I like it.
I don’t think there have been any Islamic terror attacks in the US in the last 100 days.
I proclaim Trump’s first travel ban a success! /s
At least we can all rest assured that this legal setback hasn’t impeded in any way Chiselin’ Trump efforts towards figuring out What the hell is going on?
They peppered Acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall with questions about whether they could consider Trump’s campaign statements calling for a ban on Muslims entering the U.S., with one judge asking if there was anything other than “willful blindness” that would prevent them from doing so.
Ah the old willful blindness defense. This should go well for Trump. Now the “so-called” Appeals Court Judges are asking the same question that was asked by the “so called” District Court Judge sitting all by himself out on that damn island. Can the President have his Muslim ban if he doesn’t use the word Muslim?
Why do I have a feeling the admin legal team’s main argument will be “but we deleted the campaign website statements about banning Muslims!”?
Any jurisdiction likely to be impacted by the ban (which is all of them) have standing to sue to block the EO, hence the multiple suits in multiple district courts.