Trump’s immigration order created the first, but far from the last, unmitigated clusterfuck of his young presidency. In a stroke of genius, El Caudillo simultaneously
- Caused grievous harm to a large number of people whose stories will resonate with the public
- Bigly pissed off the billionaire class
- Alarmed our allies
- Gave aid and comfort to our enemies, and, just to add icing to the cake,
- Violated the Constitution.
This is a signal achievement. Only a world historical figure like Donald Trump could have done it. As He put it so well in his convention speech, “I, alone, can fix it.”
You do not need Aardvark to tell you so, and he will not attempt to amplify. A good explanation of how things stand as of Sunday morning, January 29, may be found at Bloomberg Politics.
I would, however, like to direct your attention to the language of the emergency order issued last night in the Darweesh case by District Judge Donnelly.
The good judge’s decision should be read in context: when considering a pretrial injunction, a trial judge must consider the plaintiffs’ likelihood of proving their case at trial, the injury to plaintiffs if their request isn’t granted, and the injury to defendants if their request is granted.
It’s significant, in my view, that Judge Donnelly minced no words. As the first predicate for her order, she wrote,
The petitioners have a strong likelihood of success in establishing that the removal of the petitioner and others similarly situated violates their rights to Due Process and Equal Protection guaranteed by the U nited States Constitution.
Other legal actions are under way across the country.
The system is under stress, but it is not yet broken.
Judges and officers shalt thou make thee in all thy gates, which the LORD thy God giveth thee, throughout thy tribes: and they shall judge the people with just judgment.
Politico calls the immigration clusterfuck President Trump’s First Defeat.
The article gets the job done but states, in an accurate but unintentionally misleading way, that Judge Donnelly did not rule on the unconstitutionality of Trump’s actions. She had no occasion to make a definitive ruling, because the case was at a preliminary stage and the poor government lawyers had not had a chance to research and write a brief. What she did say is quoted above: that the plaintiffs have a strong likelihood of obtaining a definitive ruling that the president acted unconstitutionally.