And this what makes it an Activist Court, it's inability to determine whether an EO can involve matters of immigration.
"The Government has pointed to no evidence that any alien from any of the countries named in the Order has perpetrated a terrorist attack in the United States."
The court makes the woefully naive argument that terrorist organizations give a nation an itinerary for their coming attacks, and each country on earth has it's own unique nations who sends them terrorists, that in fact, terrorist organization are forbidden to operate on multiple fronts. Naive is perhaps an understatement.
If the POTUS was notified 1 year in advance of 9/11 that planes would be flown into buildings by foreign nationals, the 9th would argue no steps can be taken to enhance visa screening because no crime has occurred in the US yet.
The reference to the Japanese Internment Camps is perhaps the most insulting of all their arguments. That was an EO that was literally a crime by statute against US citizens and legal residents that involved false imprisonment. A bit of stretch from 90 days of visa review? Ya think?
The 9th also says that you must consider what Donald Trump said as a private citizen, in a country that still retains some free speech, as more significant than any written legal document put before their court. O'rly?
And the punchline? Even though the printed document says 90 and 120 days, the 9th argues "what is to stop them from going further?" This can be said for any law of any kind. What is to stop a speed limit from being moved to 1 mph? What is to stop a 30 day jail sentence from being changed to death?
That's why they are called the Nutty 9th.
Last edited: