TROUBLE IN PARADISE: Jeff Sessions Just Laid The Ultimate Smackdown On The State Of Hawaii

There seems to be quite a bit of confusion as to who has the most decision making power here in the United States. The people elected President Trump, and President Trump has made moves on our behalf. Unfortunately, those who decided that he is “not their President” are trying to circumvent the way our system works. One little news flash; if you still live in the United States, Donald Trump is your President, it’s kind of the law.

Instead of the nation respecting the executive orders, like they’re supposed to, the activist judges keep putting up petty road blocks to his order so that those the President deems to be dangerous can keep coming in. On particularly difficult area who continues to defy the law is the state of Hawaii. Federal District Court Judge Derrick Watson is trying to work around the law in order to effectively nullify the ban without really getting it struck down the legal way.

However, President Trump and his cabinet aren’t ones to back down from a fight, especially when the fight is to protect the American people. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has decided that if they say only the Supreme Court can decide this, then that’s what will have to happen. The Trump administration is going to do whatever it takes to ban potentially dangerous immigrants, even if it’s getting the SCOTUS involved.

WSB News reports:

“WASHINGTON – The Trump administration is seeking to close a legal window opened for tens of thousands of refugees to enter the United States, appealing a federal judge’s order directly to the Supreme Court.

U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson had ordered the government to allow in refugees formally working with a resettlement agency in the United States. His order also vastly expanded the list of U.S. family relationships that refugees and visitors from six Muslim-majority countries can use to get into the country, including grandparents and grandchildren.

In its appeal Friday night, the Justice Department said Watson’s interpretation of the Supreme Court’s ruling on what family relationships qualify refugees and visitors from the six Muslim-majority countries to enter the U.S. ’empties the court’s decision of meaning, as it encompasses not just ‘close’ family members, but virtually all family members. Treating all of these relationships as ‘close familial relationship(s)’ reads the term ‘close’ out of the Court’s decision.’

Only the Supreme Court can decide these issues surrounding the travel ban, the Justice Department said. ‘Only this Court can definitively settle whether the government’s reasonable implementation is consistent with this Court’s stay,’ it said.

The long, tangled legal fight is expected to culminate with arguments before the nation’s high court in October.

Citing a need to review its vetting process to ensure national security, the administration capped refugee admissions at 50,000 for the 12-month period ending Sept. 30, a ceiling it hit this week.

The federal budget can accommodate up to 75,000 refugees, but admissions have slowed under Trump, and the government could hold them to a trickle, resettlement agencies say.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions had said the administration would ask the Supreme Court to weigh in, bypassing the San Francisco-based 9th U.S Circuit Court of Appeals, which has ruled against it in the case.

The Supreme Court allowed a scaled-back version of the travel ban to take effect last month.

‘Once again, we are faced with a situation in which a single federal district court has undertaken by a nationwide injunction to micromanage decisions of the co-equal executive branch related to our national security,’ Sessions said. ‘By this decision, the district court has improperly substituted its policy preferences for the national security judgments of the executive branch in a time of grave threats.’

The administration took a first step by filing a notice of appeal to the 9th Circuit, allowing it to use a rule to petition the high court directly. There was no timetable for the Supreme Court to act, but the administration sought quick action to clarify the court’s June opinion.

The justices now are scattered during their summer recess, so any short-term action would come in written filings.

The administration has lost most legal challenges on the travel ban, which applies to citizens of Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, Iran and Yemen.

The Supreme Court’s ruling exempted a large swath of refugees and travelers with a ‘bona fide relationship’ with a person or an entity in the U.S. The justices did not define those relationships but said they could include a close relative, a job offer or admission to a college or university.

The Trump administration defined the relationships as people who had a parent, spouse, fiance, son, daughter, son-in-law, daughter-in-law or sibling already in the U.S.

Watson enlarged that group to include grandparents, grandchildren, brothers-in-law, sisters-in-law, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews and cousins.

Hawaii Attorney General Douglas S. Chin, who sought the broader definition, said Thursday’s ruling ‘makes clear that the U.S. government may not ignore the scope of the partial travel ban as it sees fit.’

‘Family members have been separated and real people have suffered enough,’ Chin said.”

The bleeding hearts have their emotional and irrational arguments in full swing as they attempt to avoid the legally imperative process by which we keep this country safe. The rest of the world has bought into these illogical laws and become the playground of the petty war lords who wish to conquer and destroy other lands now that they’ve destroyed their own.

Is it possible that President Trump went over board with his travel ban? I suppose it’s possible. I mean, there’s not a huge chance that any particular one of us will be in the wrong place at the wrong time and get blown to bits by someone who came to this country with no loyalty to anyone other than their bloodthirsty god. But then again, the President made the best decision with the information that he had at the time (which is a heck of a lot more information than we have). He was elected to protect us, to preserve our country, serve our best interest, not anyone else’s, so better safe than sorry.

(Source: WSB News)

Share if you’re grateful for a President that will keep us safe!

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.