Is the Travesty of the 9th Circuit Decision Part of the Plan?

On to the Supreme Court.
Will courts uphold the Constitution and laws passed
 by Congress? Or will judicial activists continue
to legislate from the bench?

Trump is no fool and here's a blogger's opinion who believes it's all part of the plan. I sure hope he's right!

Final Justice

"I think this is going to reach the Supreme Court and the offending executive order will be allowed to stand. To begin with, the executive order is almost inconsequential. President Trump could have achieved the same objectives without making any noise by simply implementing the long standing US immigration law. Even today he can simply hurry and implement a policy that will in effect be indistinguishable from the executive order or even harsher. The President can do that without interference from the courts. Why did he do this in the fist place? I believe he wanted the Liberal judiciary to take the bait."

Lawless 9th Circuit Court Continues Shameful History of Judicial Activism!

Injunction on Travel Ban Ruling Retained

The 9th circuit court is the most overturned appeals court in the country. In 2012 86% of the courts rulings were overturned. One wonders whether these judges have ever read the Constitution or know how to read laws passed by the Congress including the one that gives the president wide authority to limit travel. Since the injunction on the travel ban, people from the countries identified for "extreme vetting" are flooding into the country, 1/3rd from Syria. Anybody with an ounce of common sense should be worried. Pray that this is quickly resolved in favor of the President.

The Washington Times has a poll on whether or not you approve of the 9th Circuit's decision. Vote here.

Guest Post: Unwarranted Federal Judge Ruling Jeopardizes National Security

Don't tell me what the Constitution really says, I'm the
judge and I say it says whatever I say it says!

By David Martin

District Court Judge James Robart has jeopardized America's security by blocking President Trump's Executive Order on immigration which temporarily bars travelers from seven predominantly Muslim countries from entering the United States. 

The State of Washington filed action against the Executive Order on January 27, alleging that sections of the order are contrary to the Constitution, and Robart ruled in favor of the action by issuing a restraining order against the E.O. on the grounds that it does not "comport with our country’s laws, and more importantly, our Constitution." (Judge James Robart)

Robart has declared the "unconstitutionality" of the President's ban on traveling Muslims on the grounds that it discriminates against religion, however, his move is unfounded because not every religion is protected by the Constitution.