Federal Judges Mandate American Submission To Islamic Invasion

KIRSTERS BAISH – U.S. Federal judges are creating a new legal standard in which all legal standards can be rejected in order to disobey President Trump. The new legal precedence is being put into place by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in order to grant Muslims total power over our national security. They are doing so in order to uphold injunction against the travel ban that has been placed over the U.S. by President Trump. Ten judges in the majority indorsed the decision of district courts that the order by President Trump violates the Fourth Amendment. This command named Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry “speaks with vague words of national security, but in context drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination” the judges stated.

This court mandated decision is based on a brand new legal standard that has zero basis in prior Supreme Court rulings. These new legal standard permits plaintiffs to disable unbiased government actions on the foundation of private or campaign statements.

“In looking behind the face of the government’s action for facts to show the alleged bad faith… the majority grants itself the power to conduct an extratextual search for evidence suggesting bad faith, which is exactly what three Supreme Court opinions have prohibited,” stated Judge Niemeyer in the opposition.

Judge Niemeyer who was joined by two other Supreme Court judges goes on to say that “the majority, now for the first time, rejects these holdings in favor of its politically desired outcome.”

In a 10 to 3 ruling the majority of the judges will have their way. The choice will most definitely be brought to the Supreme Court where this issue will be settled one way or another with a final decision.

These activists are making an extremely risky decision putting all American lives at risk. This choice will establish a new legal standard that will have a grave effect on speech in addition to allowing Muslim plaintiffs to petition the courts requesting the obstructing of almost any single government action that mostly affects countries with a Muslim majority. Furthermore, the court is hereby constructing a whole new standard, in which the personal feelings and beliefs of a plaintiff can grant standing before a court. The Muslim plaintiff who is in charge of attempting to cease the executive order was in fact not affected personally by the travel ban. However, the plaintiff asserts that the order simply escalates hate and aggression towards Muslim-American citizens.

Basically, these liberal activist judges are attempting to initiate a whole new legal standard. In this new order, the president himself can be banned from acting in defense of our country’s national security in order to protect the feelings of Muslims. If a minority group finds the president’s actions offensive his decisions will be overturned by the courts. If the Supreme Court decides to defend and indorse this motion it will stop President Trump from taking any action at all against Muslim countries, leaving us at an even higher risk than we already are for terrorist attacks. By allowing anyone from any country to come into the U.S. based on emotions we are opening ourselves up to the people who want to see us dead. This decision will likely get even more Americans killed than have been slaughtered in recent years by anti-American attackers. So ask yourself, is a terrorist’s feelings really worth one of your family member’s lives. H/T