THERE ARE AT LEAST TWO SIDES TO EVERY STORY

Was a federal judge’s halt of revised travel ban judicial overreach?

Halt of revised travel ban judicial overreach

Travel ban shows illegal religious discrimination

 Getty Images: Pool

A federal judge's halt of President Trump's revised travel ban is an example of judicial overreach.  In an abuse of authority, Judge Derrick Watson, an Obama appointee, made himself a one-man Supreme Court by ruling that immigrants living in America can prevent the country from ever limiting immigration from predominatly Muslim countries, writes Robert Barnes in Breitbart. While the judge claims his ruling is in accordance with the First Amendment, Barnes claims that there is no precedent for the court's order. 

Keep on reading at Breitbart

President Trump's revised travel ban deserved its temporary restraining order because it unconstitutionally tries to ban immigrants of a particular religion. Judge Derrick Watson was able to justify his ruling by citing White House press releases and television appearances by Trump allies that called for a 'complete shutdown of Muslims entering the country,' writes Tara Golshan in Vox, who further explains that the Executive Order's religious objective makes it unlikely to ever legally stand up in courts.

Keep on reading at Vox
22.4%
Where do you stand?
77.6%
Play
What Kind Of Traveller Are You?
Want to play?

SHOW COMMENTS
Write a response...
See what else you’re missing
single