The federal court judge who blocked President Trump’s temporary travel ban is the poster child for everything that’s wrong with America’s legal system.
U.S. District Judge James Robart is the man who blocked President Trump’s temporary immigration ban. The president’s decision to stop refugees from seven countries that are known breeding grounds for jihadists was prudent.
Click here to get Todd’s latest book – described by liberals as the most deplorable book in America.
In my estimation, we do not have a moral or constitutional obligation to let people into the country who want to blow us up or chop off our heads.
Judge Robart’s restraining order puts Americans in harm’s way and, as the Associated Press reports, contained erroneous information.
The judge said not a single person from any of the seven banned countries has been arrested for extremism. It turns out that was not true.
“The judge said not a single person from any of the seven banned countries has been arrested for extremism. It turns out that was not true.”
Yes, but the judges argument is fallacious
It is completely irrelevant if we have had one because the ONLY way we would NEVER have one is if we NEVER let any in
So he is begging the question, assuming the premise in the conclusion and is a logical fallacy of circular reasoning
The ONLY relevant question, what is our security risk RELATIVE to ALL other countries if we DO NOT look more closely at individuals from these counties asking for entrance in to ours?
The Senate needs to begin impeachment proceeding to remove this judge from the bench. This is no mistake, or an error in judgment but an attempt to use the power of his position to commit an illegal act of preventing the President from doing his job, undermining the Rule of Law, and aiding the enemies of the United States
Then he needs to be tried for a prison term, to complete his education, NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW
IMO all liberal activist judges who use the bench to legislate their leftists moronic ideals need to be removed… NOT just this turnip..
0bama went to work right away to put these flaming progressives in.
Trump, after this settles down, needs to do the same thing.
This Rotbart is not a judge, he is just a progressive being in a position to do their bidding. And so is the 9th circuit. When it goes to the Supreme Court, the prog-libs will do the same thing. Old w(b)itch Ginsburg is staying on for that reason alone. The Supreme Court has become a rubber stamp for the left.
And so are all 3 of those dweebs on the 9th circus court!
Liberals hate the Constitution. The oath of office demands that the person defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.
Especially in the judicial branch, every single one of them ought to LOVE the Constitution, as-is, not as they think it should be. This only leads to activism.
“as-is, not as they think it should be”
Every argument, ULTIMATELY, rest upon an axiom. Self evident truths
Will argue it is impossible for one to understand the Constitution without holding Christian axioms, articles of faith, as the foundation of their understanding
And will further argue what the church (little “c” versus Church, the elect) today, is teaching is NOT the GOSPEL
The point of the cross was not to save man from hell, to make him right, but so he can SEE that G-d has given ALL HE IS to us so as to be equal WITH him
And this is where we error in thinking if one is rich they are better than the poor, if physically able better than the disabled, ALL are made EQUAL to G-D.
From understanding this one then can see how the Rule of Law works, and our Constitution
It is the one thousand, seven hundred and seventy-six years of thought of Western civilization on this point which self government is based and is entirely derived from the historical point of Christs crucifixion upon the cross
That is WHY it does not exist anywhere else in the world, and why liberals think everyone can be one of us without thinking the thoughts to see things for what they are.
They DO NOT HOLD THESE TRUTHS
“WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness”
I agree Gadget. If one cannot rule on the Constitution itself, without bringing your own PoV into play, one does not deserve to be on the bench.
The drive-by trolls got you, Jota_
Yes, the TRUTHS mentioned in our founding documents are both biblical and self-evident. That’s why they aren’t shared by the Dems. Dems hate the Bible and are blind to reality. They can’t see good or bad, right or wrong, absolute truth or absolute lie. To them up is down, left is right, good is bad, war is peace.
This is no exaggeration either. Look at Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize. The man spent every day of his 8 years in office as Commander In Chief of a war somewhere. Nobody else ever did. And he got a Nobel Peace Prize, as in they think he’s a champion of peace.
Ronald Reagan won the Cold War without firing a shot, and he didn’t get a NPP.
The prize itself is now sullied by the stench of the liberal team running the show.
And now they think Trump is BOTH Putin’s best friend AND about to start WW3 with Russia. What?
But just a few months ago, Hillary was actually bragging about her plans to go to war with Russia.
If you’re as confused as I am by all this liberal nonsense, good. If it all makes sense somehow, then you’re a hopeless liberal.
Fiat rulings from the bench is the way demlibs have always governed when in the minority in congress. Loading the bench with constitution bending judges is a HUGE insurance policy. Rule of law is whatever the popular thought of the day happens to be for these charlatans which is in effect no law at all. They wont leave their positions and unfortunately seem to live forever.
The Constitution makes provisions for the Congress to limit what cases a court may hear. Looks like they need to do that ASAP.
If you listen to a Chief Justice speak, they are pointing out that they, the Justices, MAKE law. In actuality, they have been “reinterpreting” the constitution. The constitution is NOT that hard to understand, and to say it needs an old man or woman to interpret the Constitution is ludicrous. Most of the older generations took “Constitution 101” in high school so they have a good understanding of its history. For instance, they understand that there is NO reason to write a “birthright” bill, because there was a amendment when the Constitution was put into force in the beginning. The story goes basically, the a representative from France was visiting Congress in the early days, and was with his young pregnant wife, and during that time she gave birth. The scenario was that someone commented that the newborn was an American citizen due to automatic citizenship. This upset the Frenchman, because he demanded that his child would be a French citizen, and having a citizenship in America, that would preclude that. This required that the Constitutional amendment be altered, and It was quickly done.
We can only hope that Trump has learned from the mistake that Bush made by nominating a judge that was highly recommended by 2 of the most liberal democrats in the Senate. Maybe a recommendation from a democrat should be grounds for disqualification from consideration.
Not only do we need extreme vetting of all judges but also extreme term limits, period!
Enough of these tyrannical rogue judges making a mockery of established statutes and laws.
IMO we also need better laws in place for how and when judges can be removed from the bench!
I want to see one of these IDIOTS stand up like a MAN and take the responsibility of caring for them and paying for the crimes they may commit. Oh great one! what is an American life worth to you. You pinheads may I say may wake up when one of your loved ones is the victim. Put yourself in Mr. Stine place. I hope I spelt his name right. I have two daughters and I can’t imagine the hell he went through. God bless his family, my PRAYERS are with them.
The attorney appearing before this kangaroo-er-judge(?) wasn’t very well prepared, but even if she had been, it would have made no difference whatsoever. Judge Kangaroo was going to rule the way he did no matter what.
After all, laws are made from the bench, don’t you know?. A judges’ agenda supercedes the Constitution, just ask any demoRAT.
The President is under no obligation to adhere to this ruling. It is an opinion of the judge, not the law. President Trump should just say, thanks for you opinion, then enforce his executive order anyway. obama did it numerous times.
There is an outrageous number of members of both houses of congress who are lawyers. There should be a Constitutional amendment to stop this forever. These judges like robard should not only be removed from the bench but jailed for sedition. Anything they do contrary to the Constitution is sedition and in many instances treason and it’s way past time for them to pay the penalty for their actions. Lastly there is no such thing as a “democrat” anymore. They are now full blown communist as far as I am concerned it’s time for them to be jailed and then deported. This certainly goes for their protesters/rioters who must be stopped and very soon. Anyone supporting these anarchist monetarily should be executed as there have been deaths resulting from their actions.
Judge Robart should be impeached for his ridiculous and idiotic
slap at the rule of law and attempt at debasing the power of
the President. The frivolous attack by political hacks in State
Offices should be reviewed and their jobs terminated…….William
Can’t wait until POTUS Donald Trump fills the appellate courts with conservative jurists.
The current system involves a political person (the president) nominating a judge and confirmation by a political group (the Senate) to a LIFETIME term of office. Instead, I highly recommend an amendment to the Constitution requiring the DIRECT ELECTION of all federal judges by the people of the respective jurisdictions: district-wide for trial judges, multi-state for appeals judges, and nation-wide for the supreme court with staggered 6-year terms of office (just like the Senate).
IF you have a good judge, re-elect but if not, elect a new one !! In this way, federal judges will be aware that they are to serve “We, the People,” not their own (often un-constitutional) personal opinions.