Sixty-Seven Years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the Constitutionality of Title 8 United States Code, Sub-Section 1182, the Statute under which President Trump restricted immigration from certain countries. The highest court in the land found it acceptable.
The present US District Courts and now, the Fourth Circuit of the Court of Appeals, don't even bother looking at the Supreme Court decision; ruling instead that campaign comments are enough to void an otherwise perfectly lawful Executive Order. These federal Judges are either incompetent or evil -- and I don't believe they're incompetent.
U.S. Supreme Court
Knauff v. Shaughnessy, 338 U.S. 537 (1950)
United States ex Rel. Knauff v. Shaughnessy
Argued December 5-6, 1949
Decided January 16,1950
338 U.S. 537
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
..."Whatever the procedure authorized by Congress is, it is due process as far as an alien denied entry is concerned."
Since 8 U.S. Code § 1182 is a procedure authorized by congress and the Supreme Court already accepted this statute as it relates to the above case from 1950, Trump's Immigration Executive Order has already been deemed by the Supreme Court to be constitutional by means of case law precedent. It states:
(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President
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.
The case cited above was during a national emergency that was declared by the President 5/27/41, i.e. WW2.
Congress passed laws keeping aliens out during a declared national emergency. The executive branch enforces those laws.
From the 4th Circuit Decision, "Congress may in broad terms authorize the executive to exercise the power, e.g., as was done here, for the best interests of the country during a time of national emergency. Executive officers may be entrusted with the duty of specifying the procedures for carrying out the congressional intent. What was said in Lichter v. United States, 334 U.S. 742, 785, 68 S.Ct. 1294, 1316, 92 L.Ed. 1694, is equally appropriate here."
The trouble with the Fourth Circuit is they never bothered to mention the fact that we've been in a state of DECLARED NATIONAL EMERGENCY since 9/11.
Former HNIC Obama even extended that state of National Emergency in September of 2016.
So even if that Supreme Court determination in the case cited at the start of this article ONLY applies to a state of National Emergency then President Trump's Executive Order is valid on its face.
Once again, we are all getting to see how federal courts do not obey the written law.
If courts fail to obey the law, why should any of us obey the law when it comes to dealing with rogue courts? Just asking, rhetorically!