Once again, the far left 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has stifled President Donald Trump’s travel ban, which aims to keep people from countries with broken governments from entering America.
Broken governments mean the U.S. cannot properly vet.
From The Hill:
A panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday ruled against the third iteration of President Trump’s travel ban, saying it goes against federal law.
“We conclude that the President’s issuance of the Proclamation once again exceeds the scope of his delegated authority,” the court said in its ruling.
The most recent iteration of the ban bars people from eight countries — six of which are predominantly Muslim — from coming to the U.S.
The main plaintiff has connections to the Muslim Brotherhood, an extremist terror group.
This is the same Imam who filed the lawsuit against President Trump the first time around in March.
As previously reported, Imam Ismail Elshikh, 39, leads the largest mosque in Hawaii and claims he is suffering “irreparable harm” from the president’s executive order, which places a 90-day ban on travel to the U.S. from six countries according to research by WND.
More from WND:
The main plaintiff in the Hawaii case blocking President Trump’s revised temporary travel ban is an imam with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.
The irony is hard to miss: Trump has talked about declaring the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, and now it is a Brotherhood-backed imam who is playing a key role in blocking his executive order on immigration.
Imam Ismail Elshikh, 39, leads the largest mosque in Hawaii and claims he is suffering “irreparable harm” from the president’s executive order, which places a 90-day ban on travel to the U.S. from six countries.
One of those six countries is Syria. Elshikh’s mother in law is Syrian and would not be able to visit her family in Hawaii for 90 days if Trump’s ban were allowed to go into effect.
Hawaii’s Obama-appointed federal judge, Derrick Watson, made sure the ban did not go into effect, striking it down Wednesday while buying Hawaii’s claim that it amounts to a “Muslim ban.” The state’s attorney general, along with co-plaintiff Elshikh, claims the ban would irreparably harm the state’s tourism industry and its Muslim families.
How does something like this move forward?
The Muslim Brotherhood is no friend of the United States, yet an imam with ties to the group is allowed to stop a major Trump campaign promise?