Judge in Seattle Wants To Be President

Montesquieu , the great political philosopher, said in the 19 century:

‘There is no crueller tyranny than that which is exerted under the shadow of the law and with the colors of justice.” in Chap. XIV of “Considérations sur les causes de la grandeur des Romains et de leur décadence”).

How else to interpret the outrageous ruling of Judge James L. Robert of the Federal  Court in Seattle , Washington.

The Judge effectively has made null and void the executive order issued by the new President on immigration. Since when did a judge have the authority to determine the level of security of the nation? All past judicial decisions on such matters were clear—it is the President’s authority that prevails.

Interestingly, a Federal Court in Massachusetts on this same issue  got it right :

Accordingly, this Court declines to encroach upon the “delicate policy judgment” inherent in immigration decisions…..’

Courts interpret law —they have no authority to make it . That ‘s the nub of the issue.

In recent years in both the United States and Canada , Courts have become very bold in poking their legal noses in areas beyond both their authority and competence.

Perhaps its good this has arisen so the courts can be put back to where they really belong. Like the acting Attorney General who got the boot , its time the people ruled in making policy and laws , and these upstarts are prevented from usurping the peoples’ authority as expressed recently through a duly elected President .

As the song says –‘I can see clearly now———‘ . The progressives and their apologists cannot accept the will of the people when it goes against their candidates and policies  as we have witnessed at a number of Universities already and now see fully manifested even from the judicial bench.

As Law Professor William Jacobson of Cornell University and founder of the website ‘Legal Insurrection’ has said:

‘Hopefully the government will be in front of the 9th Circuit quickly to obtain a stay of the TRO, and if that fails, the U.S. Supreme Court. In addition to the merits, there are serious issues of whether a state has “standing” to challenge the refusal of the federal government to allow entry into the U.S. of foreigners who themselves have no legitimate claims as to visa denials.

The issue is not whether the Executive Order is wise, it’s over who gets to make the decision on what constitutes necessary security procedures with regard to foreigners wanting to enter the U.S. That decision in the past always has been reserved to the executive branch.’


3 thoughts on “Judge in Seattle Wants To Be President

  1. Very well enunciated opinion. The judiciary has been on a slow crawl toward legislating rather than interpeting. We in Canada are facing the same threat to our democrasy when appointed representatives rather than elected ones are making laws.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s