As you’re likely aware, it was the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that struck down Donald Trump’s travel ban.
One is left to wonder how they came to the conclusion that the travel ban is unconstitutional, given that the Constitution only applies to U.S. citizens.
Criticism of the 9th circuit’s decision came instantly from both sides. Liberal lawyer Alan Dershowitz said that the decision had more to do with politics than constitutionality, while Trey Gowdy was a bit more explosive, stating that “It seems clear to most of us — not on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals — there is no right to come to this country for non-citizens of the United States. It also seems clear judges are neither in a position, practically or jurisprudentially, to second guess national security determinations made by the Commander in Chief. There is a reason we elect the Commander in Chief and do not elect federal judges.”
If you think you can do the 9th Circuit’s job better than their judges can, you’d be right.
All you’d have to do is flip a coin and you’d be statistically 36 percentage points more accurate than they are, given that 86 percent of their ruling were overturned in 2012).
In light of their recent ruling, a certain Thomas Sowell quote from 2003, that again proves just how ahead of the times he always was, is going viral.
The truth ain’t too far off. They’ve ruled in the past that there’s no constitutional right to own firearms…. which is a constitutional right that’s pretty hard to miss.
The ninth circuit court is out of hand and the ever-wise Mr. Sowell could see it coming then. It’s too bad he’s chosen to retire – we could use his sage advice in draining this particular swamp.
And in case you missed it, here’s the full text of Trey Gowdy’s statement on the matter:
“No one familiar with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals should be surprised at today’s ruling. The 9th Circuit has a well-earned reputation for being presumptively reversible. Unlike the district court order, there is at least a court opinion which can be evaluated.
Of particular interest is the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal’s suggestion that even those unlawfully present in the country have certain due process rights with respect to immigration. The Court cites Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 695 (2001) for the proposition that even aliens who have committed and been convicted of certain crimes while in the U.S. unlawfully may have due process rights with respect to travel to or from the United States. In addition, the Court ventures curiously into its own role in reviewing a President’s national security conclusions.
Legal permanent residents, non-citizens with current valid visas, non-citizens with expired visas (which were once valid), aliens with no legal standing, aliens who have committed a crime but have not yet been deported and aliens who are not even present in the United States but seek to come are just a few of the categories the Supreme Court will need to determine what process is due, if any. It seems clear to most of us – not on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals – there is no right to come to this country for non-citizens of the United States. It also seems clear judges are neither in a position, practically or jurisprudentially, to second guess national security determinations made by the Commander in Chief. There is a reason we elect the Commander in Chief and do not elect federal judges.
For those, like Alexander Hamilton, who once or now wondered if the Judicial Branch would be too weak. Wonder no more.”
Both Gowdy and Sowell absolutely nailed it – the ninth circuit is dead wrong on this.