October 18, 2017

When it comes to President Trump’s attempt to restrict travel from nations with questionable vetting, it really is “deja vu all over again.”

That’s because today marks not the second but the third time a federal judge in Hawaii has ruled against the version of the “ban” at issue at the time. The newest version --- call it Travel Restrictions 3.0 --- was blocked by this same judge, Derrick Watson (the name should be familiar by now), just hours before it was to go into effect nationwide. If you recall, the Supreme Court allowed the second version to go into effect temporarily but in doing so kicked off a separate debate about which members of an extended family might be allowed in. Spouses, parents, children...aunts, uncles, third cousins twice-removed?

President Trump’s most recent modifications to the order had included the addition of Chad, North Korea (not a Muslim nation) and Venezuela (again, not Muslim), and the dropping --- not sure why --- of Sudan. The fact that his order wasn’t limited to Muslim-majority nations apparently doesn’t matter to this judge, who, when the ball is in his court, so to speak, can always find a way to rationalize blocking an absolutely constitutional exercise of Presidential power with which he disagrees. And now the case goes once again guessed it, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. We just keep going round and round on this.

This time, as he did the last time, Judge Watson said the order “lacks sufficient findings that the entry of more than 150 million nationals from six specified countries would be ‘detrimental to the interests of the United States.’” Really? To borrow a phrase from the founding fathers, I “find these truths to be self-evident.” If even one of those potential 150 million travelers is a terrorist who sneaks through whatever laughable vetting process exists, then that is highly detrimental to the interests of the United States.


Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

Comments 1-7 of 7

  • Elaine Webber

    10/19/2017 12:32 AM

    16 Muslim countries prevent anyone with an Israeli stamp on their passport from entering their countries. This has been a security policy for many years. Never heard any criticism about this.

  • John Clark

    10/18/2017 11:08 PM

    This judge, and others like him, just does NOT get it. All Trump is trying to do is weed out the bad people from the good. But it appears that it is fine and well with this judge to just let anyone into our country without knowing anything about them. This judge is unable to look at the facts. He needs to find a different line of work.

  • Heidi Yocum

    10/18/2017 05:17 PM

    I love Dona Elliott's idea! I wish it was that simple! My question is how can one activist judge stop the president from exercising his constitutional power?

  • Judi Fey

    10/18/2017 05:06 PM

    So an Obama judge in Hawaii has the ability to put our whole country at risk by allowing people not vetted from terrorist countries in. This makes no sense. Another liberals with mush fro brains.

  • kevin springs

    10/18/2017 04:53 PM

    I still cannot figure out how a federal court judge has more power than the POTUS. How can a judge any judge for that matter over rule the President?

  • Carolyn Wood

    10/18/2017 01:39 PM

    Amen! That judge needs a more pro active hobby.

  • Dona Elliott

    10/18/2017 12:21 PM

    I would suggest ALL the immigrants from these countries be sent to Hawaii & see how long this political hack lasts!