Summary: After Trump's executive order banning Muslims from seven countries was withheld by a judge, these judges will be presented with Trump's and his colleagues' past statements. In judicial review, it is important to not just take note of the stated reason of an order, but also the intended purpose. Although now Trump has taken to calling the order "extreme vetting", he at one point stated that: "Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on." In addition, Rudy Guiliani claimed that Trump "said, 'Muslim ban.' He called me up. He said, 'Put a commission together. Show me the right way to do it legally." Now all this talk of banning Muslims can prove the judges' case against Trump and his discriminatory ideas.
Analysis: It's comforting to know that Donald Trump will soon be punished for his casual and thoughtless tweets and interviews. If he does not learn from his previous mistakes, then it's possible that all of his future executive orders could potentially go down the drain. A past example of intentions being used against stated reasons was the Guinn v. US. In this case, Oklahoma had passed a law that required a person to pass a literacy test to vote, unless the person's grandfather was able to vote. Being in 1910, most African Americans' grandfathers were not able to vote, vastly excluding them.
I like your synthesis. I agree with you about Trump, and I don't think he should be tweeting at all. I don't think he realizes how immature he is being.
ReplyDelete