by Pamela Williams

What is done is done, and there can be no going back. I do want to go over some points that are outstanding in President Trump’s “immigration ban.” Number one is that President Trump had the right to issue and Executive Order on National Security without being questioned. No other President in history has been treated as unfairly as Donald Trump.

Number two Donald Trump had every right to criticize liberal Judge Robart, who used his power of the law to kill President Trump’s power of the law in placing an Executive Order to protect National Security. President Trump’s power of the law trumped Judge Robart’s power of the law. Judge Robart is not privy to the National Intelligence President Trump is privy to. No other President has been ignored and treated in such an unruly manner.

Number three when President Trump fired Sally Yates, he fired a traitor in the US Government. She clearly told on herself by replacing the laws passed by the Representatives of We The People and the Constitution WITH HER OWN PERSONAL PREFERENCES. In her own words, she refused to defend President Trump’s executive order, because she did not think it was “right”…with no regard for the Constitution. It would not surprise me if Yates was put in her position in the DOJ by someone who owned someone a favor. When we got rid of Loretta Lynch, we were hoping for a better representative of the DOJ. Now that Jeff Sessions has been sworn in, I am sure we will start to see a much needed change take place in the DOJ.

Number four the Liberals are stepping on a Conservative President who was chosen by the American people who were clearly sick of Liberals controlling the Country. Nevertheless, we are being pushed around by Liberals all over again.

www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/02/when_trump_fired_sally_yates_he_fired_a_traitor.html

What makes these liberal rejections of the rule of law even worse is their massive hypocrisy. The same liberals who say A.G.s don’t need to defend laws they don’t like tell us that in private practice, lawyers are required to use every legal technicality they can to ensure that child rapists get off scot-free. During the election, liberals told us Hillary had a moral obligation to use legal chicanery to ensure that a 41-year-old man who raped a 12-year-old girl had to serve only a few months in prison.

Yet those same liberals tell us that lawyers in the government are morally obliged to not defend laws they don’t like. That’s right: in the minds of liberals, lawyers have an obligation to help murders and rapists but not to defend laws they personally don’t like. That’s either telling us liberals really like child rapists, which seems unlikely, or that they’re hypocrites when they say people like Yates are doing the right thing.

The liberal hypocrisy also shows through in the case of Kim Davis, a government clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Liberals told us she was a monster. But when “sanctuary” cities refuse to follow the law, those same liberals commend them. Clearly thinking they are able to pick and choose what laws to follow but others aren’t shows the tyranny at the heart of modern “liberalism.”

Further review of the fact that President Trump had every right to declare his Executive Order due to National Security the following makes very clear. It, also, makes it very clear that Judge Robart and Sally Yates failed the President and the American people. Unfortunately, this cannot be corrected, and our Country may pay the consequences.

www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/265711/judicial-overreach-national-security-joseph-klein

President Trump acted well within his constitutional and statutory authority to issue his executive order. “The exclusion of aliens is a fundamental act of sovereignty,” the Supreme Court concluded in a 1950 case. “The right to do so stems not alone from legislative power, but is inherent in the executive power to control the foreign affairs of the nation. When Congress prescribes a procedure concerning the admissibility of aliens, it is not dealing alone with a legislative power. It is implementing an inherent executive power.”

Congress reaffirmed the president’s power with respect to decisions excluding aliens in the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”), which was originally enacted in 1952, and has been amended several times, including in 1996. The following language has remained intact: “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.” (8 U.S.C. § 1182(f)).

President Trump’s executive order, in the interest of protecting national security, directed changes to the policy and process of admitting non-citizens into the United States. It was intended to provide a period of review for relevant agencies to evaluate current procedures and to propose and implement new procedures. The purpose falls squarely within the president’s constitutional and statutory authority and responsibility, as stated in the executive order, “to ensure that those approved for admission do not intend to harm Americans and that they have no ties to terrorism.”

Judge Robart exceeded his judicial authority and has potentially put Americans at needless risk. If the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals does not promptly reverse his reckless decision, the Department of Justice will need to take this case directly to the Supreme Court.

In conclusion, I feel that I have proven that Judge Robart improperly used the law to kill the actual rule of law. He should be disbarred, and President Trump and the American people are owed a great apology, especially by Sally Yates and Judge Robart.

