The “resistance” has apparently infiltrated even the highest levels of our judicial system, after a federal judge issued a stunning and unfathomable order to the Trump administration.
From the moment that now-President Trump stepped onto the political scene, his premiere message to the American people was one of border security. His hopes for a “big, beautiful wall” on the southern border with Mexico virtually catapulted the business mogul into the Oval Office, with his constituents electorally eviscerating democratic nominee Hillary Clinton back in 2016.
As we fast forward two years from that election, the border wall is still a sticking point among the partisans of Capitol Hill, due in no small part to the gargantuan migrant caravan currently amassing in Tijuana, Mexico…just yards from sunny California and their sanctuary cities.
Now, as if to further jostle this volatile powder keg, a federal judge has made a ruling aimed at discrediting and embarrassing the Trump administration’s use of law and order.
A federal judge on Wednesday took the extraordinary step of ordering that asylum seekers who sued after their deportation be returned to the U.S. to have their claims heard anew, ruling against the Trump administration’s revised asylum policies.Trending:
The ruling from U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan in Washington came a day after the same judge presided over a contentious sentencing hearing for former national security adviser Michael Flynn — in which he questioned whether the ex-White House official committed “treason” and accused him of selling out the United States to foreign interests. He later delayed Flynn’s sentencing until 2019, as part of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation.
In his sweeping ruling Wednesday against the Trump administration’s immigration policies, Sullivan said recent changes violated federal law.Advertisement - story continues below
“The Court holds that it has jurisdiction to hear plaintiffs’ challenges to the credible fear policies, that it has the authority to order the injunctive relief, and that, with the exception of two policies, the new credible fear policies are arbitrary, capricious, and in violation of the immigration laws,” Sullivan concluded.
There has been no word yet on whether there are any further legal opportunities to challenge the ruling.