By Ronald C. Tinnell
Liberals are making a big deal out of the temporary travel ban controversy. Why? Somehow I doubt that they really care about the "rights" of several hundred or thousand foreigners to enter the U.S. The real reason is that it is the only place where they are winning against the President. The President has the Constitution and the Law on his side, while the liberals have a judge in Washington, a bunch of liberal judges on the Ninth Circuit, and four steadfast liberals on the Supreme Court. Liberals are thinking: "Great! We'll win on this one."
Not so fast. In a fairly adjudicated case, it's an open and shut case for the President. A decision to uphold the Ninth Circuit, places a big question mark on the competence of any judge that rules in favor of it. He or she would be going against the Constitution and the Law and endangering national security all at the same time. Decisions like this are common as dirt in the Ninth Circuit, but the Supremes are usually a little more careful. Ninth Circuit decisions are overturned in the Supreme Court so often that lawyers say that if you lose in the Ninth Circuit, you are guaranteed a win in the Supreme Court.
Due to the stupidity of the Liberals, the President is now in a no lose situation. If he gets the injunction lifted at the Supreme Court, he wins. If he does not, he has this case to use as an example of the Judiciary's bias. He can say: "Look, they ignored the Constitution and the Law, invented rights for foreigners, and put the whole American public at risk." Even if he loses in court, he will win in the court of public opinion. If there is a terrorist incident attributable to the judicial actions, he will win big time. Even without such an incident, his hand will be strengthened in all future dealings with the courts.
I hereby issue a challenge to liberal minded legal authorities: "Speak up! Tell us what you really think about this decision. Explain how it is a fair interpretation of legal statutes, applicable case law and the provisions of the Constitution." I doubt very many will accept this challenge. It places their legal credentials in conflict with their liberal credentials.