TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, ET AL. v. HAWAII ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No.
17–965. Argued April 25, 2018—Decided June 26, 2018
ajority Ruling based on Secret Government Review (excerpt)
“In September 2017, the President issued Proclamation No. 9645, seeking
to improve vetting procedures for foreign nationals traveling to the United
States by indentifying ongoing deficiencies in the information needed to assess
whether nationals of particular countries present a security threat. The Proclamation
placed entry restrictions on the nationals of eight foreign states whose
systems for managing and sharing information about their nationals the
President deemed inadequate. Foreign states were selected for inclusion based
on a review undertaken pursuant to one of the President’s earlier Executive
Orders.…
“As part of the review, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in
consultation with the State Department and intelligence agencies, developed an
information and risk assessment ‘baseline.’ DHS then collected and evaluated
data for all foreign governments, identifying those having deficient
information-sharing practices and presenting national security concerns, as
well as other countries “at risk” of failing to meet the baseline.
“After a 50-day period during which the State Department made diplomatic
efforts to encourage foreign governments to improve their practices, the Acting
Secretary of Homeland Security concluded that eight countries—
Chad, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea,
Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen—remained deficient.”
[Bold emphasis added.
ALSO NOTE that the Trump Government’s selected
countries are and have been for a long time under US threat (verbal or physical
threat); are being occupied by US military personnel and or US contractors and
sundry partners; have suffered repeated US breaches of their sovereignty—including
war, direct bombing and drone strikes, provocation and destabilization, assassination
and government overthrows, arming, aiding and abetting individuals, governments
and terrorist groups against them. With the exception of Venezuela and the
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea), all of the US regime’s selected
nations are 90 % or more Muslim.
Note also that none of these countries are in any way a threat to the United States of America or to its people!]
ajority Court ruling continues
“She [Acting Secretary of Homeland Security] recommended entry
restrictions for certain nationals from all those countries but Iraq, which had
a close cooperative relationship with the U. S. ‘She also recommended including
Somalia [See my note above], which
met the information-sharing component of the baseline standards but had other
special risk factors, such as a significant terrorist presence.
“After consulting with multiple Cabinet members, the President adopted
the recommendations and issued the Proclamation.
Under these circumstances, the Government has set forth a sufficient
national security justification to survive rational basis review. We express no
view on the soundness of the policy. We simply hold today that plaintiffs have
not demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of their constitutional
claim.”
otomayor’s dissent (excerpt)
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States Sonia
Maria Sotomayor
“…the Court, without explanation or precedential support, limits its review
of the Proclamation to rational-basis scrutiny. Ibid. That approach is
perplexing, given that in other Establishment Clause cases, including those
involving claims of religious animus or discrimination, this Court has applied
a more stringent standard of review. … But even under rational-basis review,
the Proclamation must fall. That is so because the Proclamation is “‘divorced
from any factual context from which we could discern a relationship to
legitimate state interests,’ and ‘its sheer breadth [is] so discontinuous with
the reasons offered for it’” that the policy is “‘inexplicable by anything but
animus.’”
Moreover, “even a cursory review of the Government’s asserted national-security
rationale reveals that the Proclamation is nothing more than a “‘religious
gerrymander.’” Lukumi, 508 U. S., at 535. Most alarming… “the majority empowers
the President to hide behind an administrative review process that the
Government refuses to disclose to the public. See IRAP II, 883 F. 3d, at 268 (‘[T]he
Government chose not to make the review publicly available” even in redacted
form)…”
SOTOMAYOR continues (excerpt)
Ultimately, what began as a policy explicitly “calling for a total and
complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States” has since morphed into
a ‘Proclamation’ putatively based on national-security concerns. But this new
window dressing cannot conceal an unassailable fact: the words of the President
and his advisers create the strong perception that the Proclamation is
contaminated by impermissible discriminatory animus against Islam and its
followers.”
“The First Amendment stands as a bulwark against official religious
prejudice and embodies our Nation’s deep commitment to religious plurality and
tolerance. That constitutional promise is why, ‘[f]or centuries now, people
have come to this country from every corner of the world to share in the
blessing of religious freedom.’… . Instead of vindicating those principles,
today’s decision tosses them aside. In holding that the First Amendment gives
way to an executive policy that a reasonable observer would view as motivated
by animus against Muslims, the majority opinion upends this Court’s precedent,
repeats tragic mistakes of the past, and denies countless individuals the
fundamental right of religious liberty.”
OURT MAJORITY concludes (excerpt)
“Because plaintiffs have not shown that they are likely to succeed
on the merits of their claims, we reverse the grant of the preliminary
injunction as an abuse of discretion. [Winter v. Natural Resources Defense
Council, Inc., 555 U. S. 7, 32 (2008)]. The case now returns to the lower
courts for such further proceedings as may be appropriate.”
OTOMAYOR concludes (excerpt)
“Our Constitution demands, and our country deserves, a Judiciary
willing to hold the coordinate branches to account when they defy our most
sacred legal commitments. Because the Court’s decision today has failed in that
respect, with profound regret, I dissent.”
Sources and notes
Delivering the majority opinion of the Court: Chief Justice ROBERTS; concurring
Justices KENNEDY, THOMAS, ALITO, GORSUCH; dissenting Justices: BREYER joined by
KAGAN and SOTOMAYOR joined by GINSBURG.
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2017 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible,
a syllabus (head note) will be released, as is being done in connection with
this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part
of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions
for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber &
Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus
TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, ET AL. v. HAWAII ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No.
17–965. Argued April 25, 2018—Decided June 26, 2018 https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/17-965_h315.pdf
Current Justices
of the Supreme Court of the United States: John Roberts, Chief Justice since
September 29, 2005 ● Anthony Kennedy, Associate Justice since February 18, 1988
● Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice since October 23, 1991● Ruth Bader
Ginsburg, Associate Justice since August 10, 1993● Stephen Breyer, Associate
Justice since August 3, 1994 ● Samuel Alito, Associate Justice since January
31, 2006 ● Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice since August 8, 2009 ● Elena
Kagan, Associate Justice since August 7, 2010 ● Neil Gorsuch, Associate Justice
since April 10, 2017 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Justices_of_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
US history of
AGGRESSION against Muslim countries
Dr. Zoltan
Grossman. “From Wounded Knee to Syria: A Century of U.S. Military Interventions
a partial list of U.S. military interventions from 1890 to 2018”
Excerpt from the years 1990-2018 – Muslim (90% + except
Bosnia 50%) nations in BOLD.
- IRAQ 1990-91 Bombing, troops, naval Blockade of Iraqi and
Jordanian ports, air strikes; 200,000+ killed in invasion of Iraq and
Kuwait; large-scale destruction of Iraqi military.
- KUWAIT 1991 Naval,
bombing, troops Kuwait royal family returned to throne.
- IRAQ 1991-2003 Bombing, naval No-fly zone over Kurdish north,
Shiite south; constant air strikes and naval-enforced economic sanctions
- SOMALIA 1992-94 Troops, naval, bombing U.S.-led United Nations
occupation during civil war; raids against one Mogadishu faction.
- YUGOSLAVIA 1992-94 Naval
NATO blockade of Serbia and Montenegro.
- BOSNIA 1993-? Jets, bombing No-fly zone patrolled in civil
war; downed jets, bombed Serbs.
- HAITI 1994 Troops, naval
Blockade against military government; troops restore President Aristide to
office three years after coup.
- ZAIRE (CONGO) 1996-97
Troops Troops at Rwandan Hutu refugee camps, in area where Congo
revolution begins.
- LIBERIA 1997 Troops
Soldiers under fire during evacuation of foreigners.
- ALBANIA 1997 Troops
Soldiers under fire during evacuation of foreigners.
- SUDAN 1998 Missiles Attack on pharmaceutical plant alleged to
be “terrorist” nerve gas plant.
- AFGHANISTAN 1998 Missiles Attack on former CIA training camps
used by Islamic fundamentalist groups alleged to have attacked embassies.
- IRAQ 1998 Bombing, Missiles Four days of intensive air strikes
after weapons inspectors allege Iraqi obstructions.
- YUGOSLAVIA 1999 Bombing,
Missiles Heavy NATO air strikes after Serbia declines to withdraw from
Kosovo. NATO occupation of Kosovo.
- YEMEN 2000 Naval USS Cole, docked in Aden, bombed.
- MACEDONIA 2001 Troops NATO
forces deployed to move and disarm Albanian rebels.
- AFGHANISTAN 2001-? Troops, bombing, missiles Massive U.S.
mobilization to overthrow Taliban, hunt Al Qaeda fighters, install Karzai
regime, and battle Taliban insurgency. More than 30,000 U.S. troops and
numerous private security contractors carry our occupation.
- YEMEN 2002 Missiles Predator drone missile attack on Al Qaeda,
including a US citizen.
- PHILIPPINES 2002-? Troops,
naval Training mission for Philippine military fighting Abu Sayyaf rebels
evolves into combat missions in Sulu Archipelago, west of Mindanao.
- COLOMBIA 2003-? Troops US
special forces sent to rebel zone to back up Colombian military protecting
oil pipeline.
- IRAQ 2003-11 Troops, naval, bombing, missiles Saddam regime
toppled in Baghdad. More than 250,000 U.S. personnel participate in
invasion. US and UK forces occupy country and battle Sunni and Shi’ite
insurgencies. More than 160,000 troops and numerous private contractors
carry out occupation and build large permanent bases.
- LIBERIA 2003 Troops Brief
involvement in peacekeeping force as rebels drove out leader.
- HAITI 2004-05 Troops, naval Marines & Army land after
right-wing rebels oust elected President Aristide, who was advised to
leave by Washington.
- PAKISTAN 2005-? Missiles, bombing, covert operation CIA
missile and air strikes and Special Forces raids on alleged Al Qaeda and
Taliban refuge villages kill multiple civilians. Drone attacks also on
Pakistani Mehsud network.
- SOMALIA 2006-? Missiles, naval, troops, command operation
Special Forces advise Ethiopian invasion that topples Islamist government;
AC-130 strikes, Cruise missile attacks and helicopter raids against
Islamist rebels; naval blockade against “pirates” and insurgents.
- SYRIA 2008 Troops Special Forces in helicopter raid 5 miles
from Iraq kill 8 Syrian civilians
- YEMEN 2009-? Missiles, command operation Cruise missile attack
on Al Qaeda kills 49 civilians; Yemeni military assaults on rebels
- LIBYA 2011-? Bombing, missiles, troops, command operation NATO
coordinates air strikes and missile attacks against Qaddafi government
during uprising by rebel army. Periodic Special Forces raids against
Islamist insurgents.
- IRAQ 2014-? Bombing, missiles, troops, command operation
- SYRIA 2014-? [2018]
Bombing, missiles, troops, command operation
Air strikes and Special Forces
intervene against Islamic State insurgents; training other Syrian insurgents;
bombing alleged Syrian government chemical arms sites.
https://sites.evergreen.edu/zoltan/interventions/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_by_country
Insight Beyond Today’s News, CLB
“SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) Renders… ‘State
of the Union’ in Janus Decision” 
