![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Be running up that road, be running up that hill with no problems
Happy Ides! I just learned that the revised travel ban has been blocked nationwide by Judge Derrick Watson of Honolulu. It is a temporary restraining order issued in the nick of time and we'll see what happens next, but it is a very good start.
[edit] And the Netherlands may not have imploded in their own puff of right-wing anti-Islamism after all, so good for them!
[edit] And the Netherlands may not have imploded in their own puff of right-wing anti-Islamism after all, so good for them!
no subject
no subject
Well warranted!
no subject
no subject
no subject
So long as this mess ends up with him being put firmly to bed instead of allowed to play with more matches:
no subject
no subject
Amen!
no subject
no subject
Judge Watson's entire ruling is available online and it is wonderful:
"The Government appropriately cautions that, in determining purpose, courts should not look into the 'veiled psyche' and 'secret motives' of government decisionmakers and may not undertake a 'judicial psychoanalysis of a drafter's heart of hearts.' Govt. Opp'n at 40 (citing McCreary, 545 U.S. at 862). The Government need not fear. The remarkable facts at issue here require no such impermissible inquiry. For instance, there is nothing 'veiled' about this press release: 'Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.[]' SAC ¶ 38, Ex. 6 (Press Release, Donald J. Trump for President, Donald J. Trump Statement on Preventing Muslim Immigration (Dec. 7, 2015), available at https://goo.gl/D3OdJJ)). Nor is there anything 'secret' about the Executive's motive specific to the issuance of the Executive Order:
'Rudolph Giuliani explained on television how the Executive Order came to be. He said: "When [Mr. Trump] first announced it, he said, 'Muslim ban.' He called me up. He said, 'Put a commission together. Show me the right way to do it legally.'"'
SAC ¶ 59, Ex. 8. On February 21, 2017, commenting on the then-upcoming revision to the Executive Order, the President’s Senior Adviser, Stephen Miller, stated, 'Fundamentally, [despite 'technical' revisions meant to address the Ninth Circuit's concerns in Washington,] you’re still going to have the same basic policy outcome [as the first].' SAC ¶ 74.
These plainly-worded statements,14 made in the months leading up to and contemporaneous with the signing of the Executive Order, and, in many cases, made by the Executive himself, betray the Executive Order's stated secular purpose. Any reasonable, objective observer would conclude, as does the Court for purposes of the instant Motion for TRO, 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. See McCreary, 545 U.S. at 864."
14. There are many more. See, e.g., Br. of The Roderick and Solange MacArthur Justice Center as Amicus Curiae in Supp. of Pls.' Mot. for TRO, ECF No. 204, at 19-20 ('It's not unconstitutional keeping people out, frankly, and until we get a hold of what's going on. And then if you look at Franklin Roosevelt, a respected president, highly respected. Take a look at Presidential proclamations back a long time ago, 2525, 2526, and 2527 what he was doing with Germans, Italians, and Japanese because he had to do it. Because look we are at war with radical Islam.')
Words matter. You cannot pretend that only some of them are real. People listen.
no subject
no subject
I really like that way of thinking of it. Now we just need somewhere in the middle to stand up and we'll have a national spine.
no subject