Since Donald Trump made good on his promise to ban Muslims from the United States, federal judges have practically fallen all over themselves finding new ways to declare the president's executive order unconstitutional. On Friday, a judge in Seattle delivered the most significant blow yet, issuing a temporary restraining order that prohibits enforcement of the ban not only in Washington but in all 50 states. (For those of you wondering how this is possible, the judge's order very deliberately cites to a 2015 decision that, on a nationwide basis, nixed a controversial immigration-related executive order signed by President Obama. The problem with winning an audacious legal argument is that you never know when it might come back to bite you in the ass.)

This is not the end of the Muslim ban. A temporary restraining order is an emergency ruling that only, well, temporarily restrains enforcement until the court decides whether to issue a preliminary injunction, and even that doesn't actually get to the merits of the case and a final decision. The State Department and the Department of Homeland Security immediately began winding down their implementation efforts, reversing cancelled visas and resuming standard pre-ban inspection procedures, but the legal fight is really just getting started.

Although it was a bad night for President Trump, he somehow still found a way to make things worse for himself. The White House immediately issued a statement vowing to fight this "outrageous order." Subsequent releases notably omitted this bit of editorializing, but the president's typically unhinged Twitter account was not similarly restrained:

It's unclear what Trump means by "so-called," since Judge Robart is very much a judge, appointed by President George W. Bush and confirmed by the Senate to the tune of a 99-0 vote. (Hm, it's almost as if Trump had no idea that being president doesn't mean that whatever he says just becomes the law.) At any rate, one judicial nominee who will not win this type of overwhelming support is Neil Gorsuch, Trump's pick for the Supreme Court. For this reason, the president's late-night social media hijinks put Gorsuch in a very tough position. Senate Democrats, justifiably upset over their Republicans counterparts' craven bullshit last year, will ask as many tough questions as they can during Gorsuch's confirmation hearings to try and derail the nomination, and like all Court nominees, Gorsuch will offer noncommittal, vanilla responses in an effort to avoid saying anything that might get him in trouble.

Democrats Shouldn't Give Donald Trump's Supreme Court Pick a Single Goddamn Vote After a nearly a year of Republican obstruction, it's time for Democrats to stop playing nice.

This question, though, will be near-impossible to duck: "Do you endorse the president's stated belief that the federal judiciary is beneath the president and bows to his will?" Gorusch would never say yes, of course, because he's a federal judge himself, and no federal judge believes this, and saying so would be a giant middle finger to his colleagues everywhere. But if Gorusch says no, he turns that same middle finger to the guy who just nominated him for the Supreme Court, and—assuming he's eventually confirmed—makes it very hard for him to explain himself if he one day votes to uphold the ban. Gorsuch already faced a grueling confirmation process, and last night, Donald Trump didn't make things any easier. (Picture this poor man, relaxing in his Washington hotel room after a long day of hearings, frantically refreshing Twitter to see if Trump has turned on him yet.)

Watch Now: This Reality Show Is Terrible