Okay. Roger that. Now. . . the last time Mr. Trump won any final, on the merits decision on his Muslim Bans 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 was. . . Oops! Never. He's zero for something like 14 now.
On to the Ninth Circuit (on Judge Watson's fine decision, here -- even though it is only a TRO -- that's been the Administration's prior approach: take immediate appeals, rather than await a final injunction order, as 45 well knows it is coming). And all of this, while we await a trial court level TRO ruling in Maryland -- with likely the same outcome as below. [Busy deal day -- so I am late with this. My apologies.]
Here's the full 40 page PDF of the opinion, from the correct and courageous USDC Judge Derrick Watson, just now -- and a bit:
. . . .On June 12, 2017, the Ninth Circuit affirmed this Court’s injunction of Sections 2 and 6 of Executive Order No. 13,780, 82 Fed. Reg. 13209 (Mar. 6, 2017), entitled “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States” (“EO-2”). Hawaii v. Trump, 859 F.3d 741 (9th Cir. 2017). The Ninth Circuit did so because “the President, in issuing the Executive Order, exceeded the scope of the authority delegated to him by Congress” in 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f). Hawaii, 859 F.3d at 755. It further did so because EO-2 “runs afoul of other provisions of the [Immigration and Nationality Act (‘INA’), specifically 8 U.S.C. § 1152,] that prohibit nationality-based discrimination.” Hawaii, 859 F.3d at 756.
Enter EO-3. Ignoring the guidance afforded by the Ninth Circuit that at least this Court is obligated to follow, EO-3 suffers from precisely the same maladies as its predecessor: it 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,” a precondition that the Ninth Circuit determined must be satisfied before the Executive may properly invoke Section 1182(f). Hawaii, 859 F.3d at 774. And EO-3 plainly discriminates based on nationality in the manner that the Ninth Circuit has found antithetical to both Section 1152(a) and the founding principles of this Nation. Hawaii, 859 F.3d at 776–79. . . .
Accordingly, based on the record before it, the Court concludes that Plaintiffs have met their burden of establishing a strong likelihood of success on the merits of their statutory claims, that irreparable injury is likely if the requested relief is not issued, and that the balance of the equities and public interest counsel in favor of granting the requested relief. Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order (ECF No. 368) is GRANTED. . . .
Me? I am grinning ear to ear. As is Professor Albert Einstein -- likely beyond the event horizon, on the other side of the known Universe.
नमस्ते
No comments:
Post a Comment