THE HILL: N. Rappaport Blasts U.S. Courts For Blasting Trump!

Paul’s summary doesn’t say enough to let you know what is in my article, so I will provide you with a few more paragraphs. Essentially, the court acknowledges that it can’t find anything wrong in the language of the Travel Ban but everyone knows that Trump has Muslim hatred in his heart, so the real intention of the order is to keep Muslims out of the country. But read the quoted sections from the decision and decide for yourself

“It is undisputed that the Executive Order does not facially discriminate for or against any particular religion, or for or against religion versus non-religion.

“There is no express reference, for instance, to any religion nor does the Executive Order — unlike its predecessor — contain any term or phrase that can be reasonably characterized as having a religious origin or connotation.”

The court writes that “any reasonable, objective observer would conclude … that the stated secular purpose of the Executive Order is, at the very least, ‘secondary to a religious objective’ of temporarily suspending the entry of Muslims.” This “assessment rests on the specific historical record,” which “focuses on the president’s statements about a ‘Muslim ban,’” including on the campaign trail and the fact that he asked Rudolph Giuliani how to do it legally.
 
According to Eric Posner, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School, the courts are creating a “Trump exception” to settled law on presidential powers by ignoring the Supreme Court’s admonition that courts may not “look behind” a “facially legitimate” reason, which with respect to the order, is the national security interest in stricter vetting.

Thanks. I appreciate the help. I get paid on the basis of how many views my articles get.