Can Donald Trump Just Ignore the Judges Objecting to his Travel Bans?

by James Buchanan

An article from reports “A Hawaii federal judge halted President Donald Trump’s revised travel ban, slamming it for discriminating against Muslims and handing the administration another setback on a core campaign issue.”

“The decision by U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson blocks a 90-day ban on new visa approvals for people from six Muslim-majority nations.”

The reason Trump’s second travel ban was held up by a judge is because he allowed a judge to hold up his first travel ban! Trump should have told the first judge that he had no authority to interfere. The president can keep out whatever people he considers a threat to the safety of the American people.

Trump’s advisors probably told him to let the judge have his way for fear of more bouts of hysteria from the liberal media (as if appeasing them ever makes them less noisy or irrational). Rather than make things better, their caution has placed Trump in a box. Every time he tries to get out of this box, another liberal activist judge will claim that Trump is violating the Constitution.

We have three branches of government in America, and there is nothing in the Constitution that says who decides whether the judicial branch is exceeding its authority. Several previous presidents have put the judicial branch in its place when they got too big for their britches.

An article from the American Thinker notes “Does it have to be this way?”

“No, Trump could simply ignore the court ruling suspending his ban.”

“Outrageous?! Unconstitutional?! Actually, it’s wholly constitutional.”

“…[H]ow is it that the judiciary has the ‘power’ to rule on law and have its decisions constrain not just its own branch, but the other two as well? How have the courts become king? Because the Constitution grants…no, stop. It’s not in the Constitution – anywhere.”

“Rather, this ‘power’ was declared by the courts themselves, most notably in the 1803 Marbury v. Madison decision.”

“That’s right: the Supreme Court gave the Supreme Court the supreme power to have the final say on laws’ meaning.”

“It’s a great con if you can pull it off.”

“The point is that the judiciary enjoys this power at the executive branch’s pleasure. As soon as the latter says, to paraphrase Andrew Jackson, ‘The courts have made their decision; now let them enforce it,’ that power goes bye-bye. The judiciary is reminded of its impotence…”

“So it isn’t just that the courts lack the sword or purse… They also have no constitutional claim to judicial supremacy. In fact, the power is a violation of everything for which America stands.”

“(Thomas) Jefferson explained why in 1820, writing that ‘to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions’ is ‘a very dangerous doctrine indeed and one which would place us under the despotism of an Oligarchy.'”

Trump needs to stop taking bad advice from his overly timid advisors and act like the Andrew Jackson-style alpha male that he is. A Social Justice Warrior with delusions of grandeur, who was promoted from his parents’ basement to the position of a federal judge by the dubious authority of Barry (Soetoro) Obama, cannot interfere with the legitimate actions of a legally-elected president, and Donald Trump needs to make this loud and clear, no matter what the predictable reaction of the ultra-left-wing, fake news media might be.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s