in , , , ,

Supreme Court Hands the Left Their Biggest Loss in a Generation

There was a lot riding on the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of the Trump travel ban. The president’s executive order, which has been through several permutations since he signed the original last January, came to symbolize the lawless, dictatorial, racist tendencies of this administration for a legion of liberals. For conservatives, Trump supporters, and those with a passing familiarity of the Constitution, the court rulings against the travel ban came to symbolize a liberal judiciary out of control – judges calling balls and strikes based on their personal ideologies rather than any sound legal reasoning.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court made its decision and the handwringing and rending of garments on the left began in earnest.

In a 5-4 decision along party lines, the Court ruled in favor of the Trump administration, endorsing the constitutional truth that the executive branch has the power to ban travelers when there exists a clear national security reason to do so. In the decision, Chief Justice John Roberts said that Trump’s third travel ban – the one that ultimately went before the high court – fit “squarely within the scope of Presidential authority.”

“The sole prerequisite set forth in [federal law] is that the President find that the entry of the covered aliens would be detrimental to the interests of the United States. The President has undoubtedly fulfilled that requirement here,” Roberts wrote.

In the ban as it currently exists, travelers from seven countries are denied entry into the United States. Six of those nations are majority Muslim in their demographics, and that is what inspired the backlash against the ban in the first place. Critics and courts said it was a thinly-disguised Muslim ban of the sort Trump talked about on the campaign trail, and was therefore in violation of the First Amendment. States challenged the ban on that basis in addition to the argument that the ban was harmful to their respective tourist industries. These justifications sounded good enough to district courts in the Pacific Northwest, but they fell flat in Washington.

In a statement following the verdict, President Trump declared victory over the activist attorneys general and judges who fought long and hard to usurp the president’s power.

“In this era of worldwide terrorism and extremist movements bent on harming innocent civilians, we must properly vet those coming into our country. This ruling is also a moment of profound vindication following months of hysterical commentary from the media and Democratic politicians who refuse to do what it takes to secure our border and our country,” the statement said. “As long as I am President, I will defend the sovereignty, safety, and security of the American People, and fight for an immigration system that serves the national interests of the United States and its citizens. Our country will always be safe, secure, and protected on my watch.”

God bless America, the Supreme Court, and Donald Trump. This is a good day.

What do you think?

26 points
Upvote Downvote

Total votes: 30

Upvotes: 28

Upvotes percentage: 93.333333%

Downvotes: 2

Downvotes percentage: 6.666667%

Comments

Leave a Reply
  1. Peoples, racial, national, ethical Diversity, to me, Is appaling! You take the 192 nations, there are today, and as the world looks at it, the divesity the world seeks will take those 192 nations, and MIX them up and amalgamte them into on big happy earthly family, Right? WRONG! There is NO way all these nation can integrate and get along! NOT one chance in 10 Billion! There are differant races because there was the “TOWER of BABEL”! There was one language and one nation before that, until, man decided he wanted to be one race and one wo lrd and yet GOD said: SEPARATE< and man refused, soooooo, Genesis ch's 10 and 11 Especailly ch 11:3-9 KJV GOD SAID…BE YE SPARATE and man continues to want to get togther, and GUESS who will have HIS "WAY"? I am betting on this! I can't loose!

  2. Those who claim that the travel ban discriminates against muslims is laughable.
    *
    We have freedom of religion enshrined in our Constitution and there are hundreds of thousands of muslims living within our country.
    *
    The issue here is terrorism and where it is emanating from. There can be no rational argument that most terrorism today is not related to the religion of islam. Another issue that should be discussed is how islam is antithetical to our culture, our way of life and our Constitution.
    *
    Any person regardless of religion who wants to enter our country for the purpose of immigration should be asked a simple question do you accept the Constitution and the laws of the United States over sharia law, do you agree to give up sharia law.
    *
    Any person who refuses to accept the Constitution and the laws of the Untied States of America and refuses to give up sharia law should never be allowed to immigrate to our country.
    *
    Freedom and liberty should not be used as a suicide pact that would ultimately destroy who and what we are as a nation.
    *
    Furthermore, this travel ban does not prohibit any muslim from practicing their religion in their own country nor does it restrict American muslims who are already living in our country from practicing their religion so I do not understand the argument that this travel ban is discriminatory.

    • As you said: Any person who refuses to accept the Constitution and the laws of the Untied States of America and refuses to give up sharia law should never be allowed to immigrate to our country.
      *I would add to that the following: Any person who agrees to accept the Constitution and the laws thereof, and then goes against that agreement, should be enough g rounds for deportation. That is one way of keeping America Great.

    • Sharia Law is enshrined in the Koran and Islam theology, that being the case all Muslims should be deported to the country of their origin or choice. Choice if the that country would accept them. Winston Churchill wrote that Islam is not compatible with a free Christian nation and he band all Islam from entering English territory. He did understand Islam for what it is.

  3. I wasn’t Aware that Venezuela and North Korea were “MUSLIM” countries but people seem to miss that fact completely. No one even mentioned it.They are on the travel ban because you can’t vet their people either and they have unstable Governments.

    • Deborah, I have never heard anything about Venezuelans and North Koreans being muslim countries. If that is the case then, it means that the leftist media is keeping it under the hat. But more power to our President Trump for keeping America safe and great.

  4. first of all if it was a muslim ban , you would have to ban them from every country including the u.s. so the whole thing was just another exagurated left wing lie

  5. If we wanted to “ban Muslims”, we would deport those already here as well. As long as Muslims peacefully assimilate, we have no problems with them practicing their religion, but WE will NOT allow Sharia Law to take precedent over Constitutional law.

  6. We are not opposed to Muslims practicing their religion or Muslims assimilating peacefully in this country or the ones already here would have been deported, which they have not been. The travel ban is NOT against Muslims or NO Muslim refugees would be admitted legally. It is a travel ban on terrorists coming from terrorist-supporting and producing countries.

  7. This is NOT a ban against Muslims or those already in the U.S. would be deported as well or interned. None have been based solely upon their religion.

    As long as they don’t come terrorist supporting countries or try to impose Sharia law in this country, they are welcome. The law of this land is the Constitution, not Sharia law. If you wish to come to this country and assimilate and practice your religion PEACEFULLY, you are welcome. Otherwise, forget it.

  8. “We, the people of the United States, IN ORDER TO…” So begins the Law of the Land of the United States. If we are divided over “IN ORDER TO,” it is because diversity which is championed by the democrat party for purposes of securing electoral majorities, is too divided to be able to devise laws which fulfill “IN ORDER TO.” The proof of this is that we are still waiting for the Congress to enact immigration legislation which will enforce border security and ensure accountability by adherence to due process of law by would-be immigrants to the U.S. The president, and citizens being victims of the inaction of the Congress on this issue, is absolutely correct in assuming executive authority to effectuate “IN ORDER TO” regarding the security interests of the U.S. Congress can act but its “diversity” speaks so loudly that “IN ORDER TO” is denied a majority.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading…

Democrats Have Launched a War on the Poor

Majority of Americans Believe Mainstream Media Intentionally Reports Fake News