Added to the list of draining the swamp, judicial activists. They must go.
Independent Sentinel by Bob Bennett
For the second time, an immigration executive order issued by the president faces a legal challenge by a number of Democratic states. KOMO News reports that Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson “filed a motion with Judge James Robart Thursday afternoon asking the judge to rule the temporary restraining order he issued on February 3 should also cover President’s Trumps new Executive Order.” A spokesperson for AG Ferguson’s Civil Rights Unit said:
“The order that Judge Robart issued on February 3rd blocked five parts,” said Melody. “Two of the same parts have reemerged in the March 6th order and we believe the TRO covers those parts.”
“The two parts in question are the ban on refugees and the restrictions placed on travel from six predominately Muslim countries. ‘With the exception of removing Iraq from that list of countries, the language is virtually identical as the original executive order,’ said Ferguson.” Oregon and New York joined the original suit Thursday, and Hawaii filed its own suit against the new EO.
“’The president does not get to decide if a new executive order is different enough to be clear from that underlying injunction,’ said Ferguson. “’The court decides that, not the president.’” In that, Ferguson is quite wrong, as you’ll read below.
Congress ignores existential threat to the republic
Congressional Republicans and the president are totally engrossed in the immediate repealing and replacing of ObamaCare. But they are ignoring a looming constitutional crisis spawned by yet another attempt by the Left to nullify the election.
If it is not stopped, this insurrection by the judiciary will prevent the president from carrying out his most important initiatives and will permanently drain the elected branches of power—an existential threat to our republic[…]