Liberal mainstream media tries very hard not to make it sound like a great victory to the person they despise the most – President Donald Trump. Their headlines read the “U.S. Supreme Court will hear Trump’s travel ban”, refusing to acknowledge that the court actually allows Trump administration to proceed with the travel ban from six mostly Muslim countries.
The first travel ban, which President Trump signed on Jan. 27, 2017 using his executive order banning 7 Muslim-majority countries – Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen – from entering the U.S. for the next 90 days, was greeted with chaos from the liberal and left-wing Americans, although surprisingly Kuwait did the same thing to its Muslim brothers and sisters.
President Trump signed his second travel ban 2 months later in March. Iraq was excluded and the new order came with a little tweak – it did not indefinitely suspend the entry of Syrian refugees. Like the first ban which was temporarily suspended by Federal Judge James Robart, the second attempt was stopped by Hawaiian District Judge Derrick Watson.
After the second blockage by Judge Derrick Watson, it was clear that the American Judicial System was playing dictatorship, trying to strip President Trump of his executive power. In essence, the world watched with disbelief how an U.S. district judge becomes more powerful than a U.S. president. There wasn’t any checks and balance anymore, until Monday.
Monday’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court allowing just about all of President Donald Trump’s travel and immigration ban to go into effect is the clearest proof that judges such as Federal Judge James Robart and District Judge Derrick Watson had delivered not only absurd decisions, but had insulted the very institution they were supposed to protect.
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear full arguments in October. But until then, the justices have thrown out the earlier temporary suspension on Trump’s executive orders, declaring that the U.S. president’s executive order can be enforced if those visitors lack a “credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States.”
Trump said that the ban would take effect 72 hours after being cleared by the Supreme Court. This means the 90-day travel ban on 6 Muslim-majority countries – Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen – will proceed. A 120-day ban on Syrian refugees also is being allowed to take effect on a limited basis. So what is the so-called “special relationship” needed?
Here’s the explanation from the Supreme Court – “For individuals, a close familial relationship is required. For people who want to come to the United States to work or study, the relationship must be formal, documented and formed in the ordinary course, not for the purpose of evading the travel ban.” If you fit these criteria, you probably might get a visa.
Those who had never been to the U.S., or had no family, business or other ties could be prohibited. The justices also wrote that an immigration-rights non-profit organization could not simply add a foreign national to a client list just so that person could travel to the United States. Obviously, the Supreme Court knew about the loophole and closed it.
But here’s the best part of the Supreme Court’s ruling. The fact that all 9 judges of the Supreme Court allow the travel ban speaks volumes about how President Trump was discriminated by pro-liberalism judges. It also proves that those judges were politically motivated when they ruled the ban as discrimination against Muslims, when in fact it was purely for national security.
Supreme Court’s decision – backed by both conservative and liberal justices – also delivers a slap on lower ranking judges such as District Judge Derrick Watson, that the President of the United States and the Executive Branch has control of the immigration process and the borders of the country. To suggest or rule otherwise means a judge is trying to usurp the power of the POTUS.
Indirectly, the Supreme Court’s ruling also means what District Judge Derrick Watson had done was both illegal and unconstitutional when he declared that foreigners, especially Muslims, have a right to enter the U.S. and enjoy the special right of First Amendment. Foreigners don’t enjoy such right; otherwise any potential terrorists could enter the country with ease.
Judge Derrick Watson was incredibly wrong for suggesting that American universities and immigrants living in U.S. can prohibit the Government of the United States of America from ever limiting immigration from Muslim-majority countries. The judge was too obsessed with his liberalism belief that Trump’s temporary “Muslim ban” was seen as discrimination, when it was not.
In fact, Hawaiian District Judge Derrick Watson was so screw-up that none of the “stalwart liberals” on the Supreme Court – including Justice Ginsburg, Justice Sotomayor, Justice Kagan and Justice Breyer – could bring themselves to agree with any of the lower court rulings enough to even write a dissent to this decision and push for keeping the stays in place.
Refused to admit defeat, liberal news media claims that the Supreme Court only allows limited version of Trump’s travel ban to take effect. That’s a truckload of horse shit, of course. Even before the Supreme Court’s ruling, the ban applied only to new visa applicants, not people who already have visas or are U.S. permanent residents, known as green card holders.
Trump’s executive order also made waivers available for a foreign national seeking to enter the United States to resume work or study, visit a spouse, child or parent who is a U.S. citizen, or for “significant business or professional obligations.” Refugees “in transit” and already approved would have been able to travel to the United States under the executive order.
Democrats, liberals and left-wingers have better hope that between now and October, when the justices will hear the case in full, there will not be any terrorist attacks that could be linked to Muslim immigrants or Muslim refugees. It would certainly help Trump build his justification papers to further ban Muslims from entering the United States.
Other Articles That May Interest You …
- America’s Judicial Dictatorship – Foreign Aliens Enjoy Special Rights To Enter U.S.
- Here’s Trump’s New Travel Ban 2.0 Designed To Withstand Legal Challenges
- Trump Has A Brilliant Strategy Against “Leaks” – How AP Got Blown Up Badly
- Trump’s Worst Enemies Aren’t Russia Or China – It’s Within America
- As Liberal Americans Burn Their Own Nation, Arab World Supports Trump’s Ban
- Clueless – Congresswomen Who Thought Bush Still The President & Putin Invaded Korea
- Trump Was Right To Ban 7 Muslim Countries – Kuwait Bans 5 Of Their Brothers Too
- A Powerful & Vengeful President Trump – ISIS & Radical Muslims Are In Grave Trouble
- BREXIT 2.0!! – Here’re 12 Major Reasons Trump Wins Presidency, Against All Odds
|
|
June 27th, 2017 by financetwitter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think the ppl working in the visa section of the KL US embassy are very pro-muslims but anti-Chinese. I was rejected twice by them when applying for social visa. There is also element of “luck of the draw”. I checked with a few of my wealthy friends ( I mention wealth bcos if u dress shabbily they wl probably look at u with utter undisguised contempt) & discovered that they were also rejected outright. These ppl are unlikely to “jump aeroplane” cos all their wealth & assets are parked here. Hv u ever encountered this?