What the heck is this?
First, a little district judge in Washington State and one in Hawaii decide that Trump cannot issue a travel just as Obama had done during his eight years in office.
Here's the report from the New York Times about the latest district judge's activist rulings--against Trump's order to defund outlaw jurisdictions protecting illegal aliens from capture and deportation:
A judge in San Francisco on Tuesday temporarily blocked President Trump’s efforts to starve localities of federal funds when they limit their cooperation with immigration enforcement, a stinging rejection of his threats to make so-called sanctuary cities fall in line.
The judge, William H. Orrick of United States District Court, wrote that the president had overstepped his powers with his January executive order on immigration by tying billions of dollars in federal funding to immigration enforcement. Judge Orrick said only Congress could place such conditions on spending.
Good news is on the way, however.
The Supreme Court of the United States waded through Washington State and Hawaii's federal opinions. Then they pushed through the 9th Circuit's overreach--again--and decided to uphold key portions of Trump's issued travel ban. They will review the entire en banc in October.
By then, however, if the Supreme Court decides to strike down Trump's travel ban (they won't), the ban will have been in effect for 90 days, which is precisely what Trump wanted!
So much winning!
Now, if the United States Supreme Court decided unanimously to overrule the district and circuit courts along the West Coast on this issue, imagine what they will rule when it comes to the sanctuary city defunding orders, too!
Get ready, West Coast, you are about to lose all your funding for declaring war on law-abiding citizens and coddling illegal aliens!
No more sanctuary cities! No more outlaw jurisdictions. The game of defying federal law without consequence is over.