To the Honorable (insert your Congressman’s name, here):
I am writing you in specific protest of the actions of at least two federal judges, possibly more, who appear to me to be flagrantly violating the United States Constitution, federal law, and their oaths of office to each.
The authority of the President to determine the circumstances under which foreign nationals may enter the United States has been repeatedly upheld by the Supreme Court. In an 1892 case, Ekiu v. United States, the Court held that, “It is an accepted maxim of international law that every sovereign nation has the power, as inherent in sovereignty, and essential to self-preservation, to forbid the entrance of foreigners within its dominions, or to admit them only in such cases and upon such conditions as it may see fit to prescribe.” Subsequent Supreme Court decisions have reaffirmed this accepted maxim.
- President Trump did not create a law. His executive order carried out an existing law.
- The text of President Trump’s executive order on immigration does not list any particular countries. That formula was in the existing law.
- The law in question is the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015, which former President Obama signed into law.
Furthermore, I respectfully request you initiate impeachment proceedings against the offending judges in direct response to their actions violating the law and the trust of the American people, as well as to send a clear message to all judges that We the People elect both our lawmakers — members of the House and the Senate — as well as the one who signs or vetoes bills — the President — and we expect all members of our judicial system at all levels to follow the law, from the supreme Law of the Land on down, without deviation or bent given to various political influence.
Background and Substantiating References:
“After a federal judge on Friday temporarily blocked the immigration order temporarily banning refugees and nationals from seven predominantly Muslim countries from entering the United States, the Department of Justice filed an appeal of the order on Saturday night.
“The Dept. of Justice asked that an emergency stay be issued pending the appeal to resume Trump’s ban efforts.
“The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco instead asked for the Trump administration to file a counter-response by Monday afternoon and denied the emergency stay.”
I hereby find both the original federal judge and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to be in violation of their oaths of office, as follows:
In the United States, federal judges are required to take two oaths. The first oath is this:
I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as (office) under the Constitution and laws of the United States. [So help me God.]
The second is the same oath that members of Congress take:
I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. [So help me God.]
Both the original federal judge as well as the judge(s) sitting on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals are required by federal law to adhere to both the Constitution as well as the laws of the United States.
President Trump’s executive order begins with full and inarguable legal justification:
“By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.) (INA), the Secure Fence Act of 2006 (Public Law 109 367) (Secure Fence Act), and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (Public Law 104 208 Div. C) (IIRIRA), and in order to ensure the safety and territorial integrity of the United States as well as to ensure that the Nation’s immigration laws are faithfully executed, I hereby order as follows…”
I have examined the legal references above. I know the Constitution very well, and immigration laws reasonably well.
Therefore, it is my informed opinion that there is zero lawful basis for either the original federal judge to block President Trump’s immigration order or for the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to stay the order as requested by the U.S. Department of Justice.
In my informed opinion, these judges are bad judges. This is not “good behavior” as required by our United States Constitution, and they need to be immediately removed from office for refusing to adhere to their oaths of office as members of the federal judiciary commensurate with our Constitution and federal law.