In light of recent events where the Judicial Activism regarding President Trump’s two Travel Ban Executive Orders, the question is raised about the effectiveness of vetting people coming from other countries. With ISIS at an all-time high and attacks in Europe continue to permeate the news, most Americans have cause to worry about their safety as refugees continue to pour in thanks to judges who don’t cite any case law or constitutional precedent to back up their restraining orders.
In a recent poll on Twitter, we asked participants whether or not they would support a complete ban on all immigration – meaning from all countries – until at such time more effective (and accurate) vetting was in place. Here are the results.
A staggering 91% of those polled would support a full ban while only 9% would not. Many comments came as a result of this post, supporting the State Department and President if a total ban is needed in order to circumvent the false claims of Muslim bans. Keep in mind that by our laws, the President can even place a Muslim ban should he deem they are a threat and danger to American citizens. After all, the Constitution tasks him with the responsibility of keeping our country safe from all threats foreign and domestic; which includes radicalized religions/political parties who see terrorism as a way of communication.
Here is the law for you to review, though many have read it on air and cited it in various articles on the issue.
It is time we start enforcing our laws even if some on the bench don’t agree with the ‘politics’ they perceive from said policies. The law is the law and no one is above them – including people who wear black robes and hob knob with ex-classmates/former Presidents.
The situation has come to a point where Judicial Activism is becoming a dangerous problem in America. We’re running a poll on Twitter addressing this, so please stay tuned for the results.