Three Judge Panel on Ninth Circuit Court Objects Unanimously
By Scott Michael Rohter, February 2017
The judicial system in America is facing a fundamental and philosophical crisis. It is the same type of existential crisis that our political system is facing. America’s courtrooms are filled with jurists who are bitterly divided along the same type of partisan and political lines that the rest of the country is. Judges in America are no more impartial than journalists are. Professors on our nation’s major college campuses are not teaching our children how to think, but rather what to think, and bias infects most of our nation’s classrooms just like bias permeates most of our nation’s courtrooms. Judges are routinely ignoring the oath they swore to enforce the Constitution while members of Congress are rewriting it without passing a single constitutional amendment. You can arrange for just about any legal opinion you want in America today if you file your case in a sympathetic court in a State where the Appeals Court is most likely to agree with you. The scales of justice in America have become tilted in a politically charged rivalry that most attorneys know how to play well.
A legal decision does not have to be correct. It doesn’t even have to be the truth. It is just an opinion and there are just as many different opinions as their are people. Everybody has one. If you file a claim in a State where the majority of people agree with you then you are probably going to get the ruling that you want. That is why the State Attorney General of Washington filed an objection to President Trump’s travel ban where the government’s appeal would be heard by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in California, the most liberal court in the country.
Public Broadcasting stated that, “The Ninth Circuit Court is perceived as “Left leaning.” There is no rightly or wrongly about it. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is the most liberal court in the country and everybody knows that except the schlemiels at National Public Radio. A panel of three liberal judges on the Ninth Circuit Court was unanimous in their decision to prevent the President of the United States from fulfilling his constitutional obligation to keep America safe.
There are two opposing views about what President Trump should do now in view of the fact that the Ninth Circuit Court has ruled against his proposed travel ban. He can thumb his nose at the Court like President Andrew Jackson did, and tell them to try to enforce their own decision while he proceeds to implement his travel ban… That would come with a risk of partisan Democrats in Congress bringing impeachment charges against him while the media keeps cheering them on.. Some people think that is exactly what the Democrats were hoping for when they filed their objections to the travel ban. In the previous administration President Obama listed those same seven countries in an executive order which placed them all on a watch list without raising a single objection from anyone.
Another viewpoint is that President Trump should just play along with the Appeals Court for now while the Administration appeals the decision to the Supreme Court… The danger in doing that is it limits the President’s immediate power to protect the country. It also establishes a dangerous precedent which limits future President’s authority in the area of national security. It is not necessarily true that President Trump is guaranteed to prevail in the Supreme Court. With justices like Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsberg, Breyer and Kennedy on the Bench nothing is guaranteed.