- The Washington Times - Thursday, June 15, 2017

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

The U.S. Supreme Court, in the coming days, will in essence decide whether a president of the United States has the right to clamp down on borders and keep out travelers from countries he deems a national security threat.

And it’s a nail-biter of a case, all right.

The justices specifically are going to decide whether or not the temporary injunction placed on President Donald Trump’s travel order should be lifted. They’re also going to decide whether or not to hear the executive’s appeal of several lower court rulings that put a stay on the ban.

This is a critical case. At issue is whether Trump has the constitutional authority to regulate border travel — or if special interests and activists judges have taken over that power.

Trump’s travel order, to those who read the text, is simply a temporary ban on travelers from six countries — countries that were previously deemed terror hot spots — from entering the United States. The reason for the ban is to allow immigration and intelligence authorities to get a handle on who’s coming in, who’s trying to come in, and whether all those “whos” are harmful to American citizens.

It’s a safety and security measure, in other words.

To those who don’t read the text — or who read the text but who are blinded by left-leaning political ideology — the Trump travel order is a ban on Muslims.

Why?

Because the six countries named — Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Iran and Yemen — happen to be mostly Muslim-populated nations.

Well, memo to left: That’s who the terrorists are — generally, followers of Islam. That ain’t Trump’s fault, or his call.

He’s just following the train of logic.

Courts all along the ban’s legal path have used Trump’s campaign rhetoric to call his executive order unconstitutional. These judges are activist in nature. At root, they tried to judge a man’s heart, rather than the text in front of their faces.

So now the ban is before the Supreme Court.

And let’s hope they don’t run and hide.

“I don’t think they will put it off until next term,” said Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation, in The Hill. “If they do, they will have chickened out, from a political standpoint.”

Quite right. The country needs the Supreme Court to step up to the plate on this one, and quickly. Once borders are breached, it’s hard to turn back the tide. And it’s not just this country that’s waiting to see if Trump’s travel ban holds strong or not. It’s the terrorists — particularly, the terrorists and would-be terrorists living in six specific nations of the world.

LOAD COMMENTS ()

 

Click to Read More

Click to Hide