Here it is.
They make three key claims:
First, Minnesota and Washington have Standing to Sue because...
We therefore conclude that the States have alleged harms to their proprietary interests traceable to the Executive Order. The necessary connection can be drawn in at most two logical steps: (1) the Executive Order prevents nationals of seven countries from entering Washington and Minnesota; (2) as a result, some of these people will not enter state universities, some will not join those universities as faculty, some will be prevented from performing research, and some will not be permitted to return if they leave.
which is..... flabbergasting. States can sue because it's possible a foreigner might go to a state school later than they otherwise would have been able to....
Then they decided:
Even if the claims based on the due process rights of lawful permanent residents were no longer part of this case, the States would continue to have potential claims regarding possible due process rights of other persons who are in the United States, even if unlawfully...
Which is equally flabbergasting. Stop a temporary pause in bringing in aliens from war-torn nations who may have violent intent against the security of the United States because of "potential" claims of "possible" due process
by illegal aliens?!? Not for nothing does the 9th Circuit have the reputation that it does.
And finally (and, this is the important bit):
The Government has pointed to no evidence that any alien from any of the countries named in the Order has perpetrated a terrorist attack in the United States.
Except that
this is completely irrelevant. The President does not need to establish that aliens from a particular country have
already conducted attacks in the United States in order to observe a deteriorating security situation / read threat reporting from the Intelligence or Diplomatic Community and make adjustments as necessary -
nor is the Judiciary adequate to the task of assessing relative threats nor is that their job.
Now, the law clearly
does give that task to the President. Again:
18 USC 1182 (F):
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. Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline.
So, if the Judiciary wanted to take this opportunity to "discover" (where it hasn't before) that 18 USC 1182 (F)
violated the Constitution, then
that would be an appropriate exercise of Judicial Review.
But this ruling doesn't do that. In fact, as near as I can tell,
this ruling does not actually address the law whatsoever. Instead it cites Trump's idiotic statements during the campaign, as though somehow that was legally controlling :roll:
