Something wasn’t quite right with Judge James L. Robart ruling to halt Trump’s immigration order. First the constitution gives the President broad powers when it comes to national security and immigration. This is for good reason – sometimes we must take quick action to neutralize a threat – we don’t have time for acts of Congress.
Presidents have long used these powers to keep America safe. This activist judge jumping in is a first. Well not the first. You see what the Judge James L. Robart buried on his ruling tells you everything you need to know about his true intentions.
The federal judge who issued a nationwide injunction against President Donald Trump’s executive order blocking immigration snuck this in his ruling.
He cited the 2015 decision by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in Texas that halted President Barack Obama’s order to grant semi-permanent residency status to millions of illegal immigrants, as the basis for his reason to block Trump.
It is a subtle jab at Trump and the republicans. It shows this is about politics not national security or the constitution.
The judge refused to limit his ruling to two states that sued as he could have – as the Boston Judge who ruled in favor of Trump did, because doing so would “undermine the constitutional imperative of `a uniform Rule of Nationalization that should be enforced vigorously and uniformly,” he said quoting Texas v. U.S, the Fifth Circuit decision.
That’s the Obama ruling.
It shows that this decision is still in place thanks to a 4-4 deadlock at the U.S. Supreme Court last year. And U.S. District Judge James L. Robart cited it in his own ruling Jan. 3, rejecting the Trump administration’s arguments that the judge should limit the temporary restraining order to Washington and Minnesota, the two states that sued to block the immigration order.