Appeals Court Keeps Block on Trump Immigration Order in Place

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/appeals-court-deliver-ruling-trump-executive-order/story?id=45386342

While this may appear way off topic for my blog… please follow the logic..  These judges would not reinstate the ban because it was determined – by them – that a certain group of people were being discriminated against because of their religion…

Could this logic be extended that the passage of the CDC opiate dosing guidelines and various states that have passed similar laws… be a discrimination AGAINST a group of HANDICAPPED PEOPLE  – covered by the ADA ?… and thus ILLEGAL..

But even though our President is the final authority on laws being enforced or not… but .. in this particular incident… a single person – a judge – in the  judicial district that has a history of having the most ruling being over turned on appeal.  So they whole issue will go back to the court system to be determined.

This is just an example of how our judicial system is not always “just” and does not always follows the letter of the law… It could also be a good example for the chronic pain community to unite … develop a “legal war chest” to challenge the constitutionality of many of the laws that are harming those in the chronic pain community.

Those who pass rules/laws/regulations/guidelines… have no mandate that what they pass … is in fact constitutional… they pass it… and it is up to those being affected/harm to take the bureaucracy to court to prove that they have exceeded their authority and their actions are unconstitutional.

A panel of federal appeals court judges ruled to keep a restraining order against Donald Trump’s controversial immigration action in place, according to court documents.

“We hold that the Government has not shown a likelihood of success on the merits of its appeal, nor has it shown that failure to enter a stay would cause irreparable injury, and we therefore deny its emergency motion for a stay,” the panel, from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, wrote in the decision Thursday.

The three-judge panel heard arguments from a lawyer representing the state of Washington Tuesday who argued that the executive order — which temporarily halted immigration from seven predominantly Muslim countries in the Middle East and Africa and temporarily shut down the refugee program — discriminated on the basis of religion among other claims.

Department of Justice lawyers claimed that the order was made on national security grounds and that Washington District Court Judge James Robart’s issuance of a temporary restraining order pausing the ban nationwide was “overbroad.”

Trump unleashed a series of attacks on Robart following the judge’s initial decision to interrupt his order last week. On Twitter, the president called Robart a “so-called judge,” said his decision was “ridiculous and will be overturned,” and added that “[i]f something happens blame him and court system.”

Those comments were later condemned by members of both major political parties. Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Judge Neil Gorsuch classified Trump’s criticisms of the judiciary as “demoralizing” and “disheartening” in conversations on Capitol Hill, according to a spokesman, but the White House insisted he was not referring to a specific case.

The administration has denied that the order is a Muslim ban.

Filed under: General Problems