Frustrated by a legal setback for his effort to slow refugee admissions and travelers from seven majority-Muslim countries, President Trump went on Twitter Saturday morning to blast a federal judge in Washington State who issued a temporary restraining order against Mr. Trump's recent immigration order, labeling the ruling "ridiculous."
"The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!" the President said on Twitter.
Credit: Jamie Dupree
Credit: Jamie Dupree
The President made his comments from his Mar-a-Lago retreat in Florida, where he is spending the weekend.
It was the second broadside by the Trump Administration against Judge James Robart, who was appointed to the federal bench by former President George W. Bush in 2004, and confirmed on a vote of 99-0 by the Senate.
On Friday night, the White House used a written statement to label the judge's decision to stay the Trump immigration order as, "outrageous," then pulled back that word in a revised statement issued 15 minutes later.
Meanwhile, various federal agencies began to roll back the President's immigration order, going back to the rules used before his order of January 27.
Democrats in the Congress fired back at the President over his "so-called" jab at Judge Robart.
The legal wrangling over a President's executive order was a reminder of what troubles President Obama encountered over his own immigration actions in 2015, as those were slowed in the courts by attorneys general from more Republican states, and ultimately blocked by the legal moves of one federal district judge in south Texas.
In his ruling, Judge Robart said the Trump order caused economic harm for states like Washington, which had quickly sued to stop the order.
"The Executive Order adversely affects the States' residents in areas of employment, education, business, family relations, and freedom to travel," the judge wrote.
Credit: Jamie Dupree
Credit: Jamie Dupree
The White House on Friday night vowed that the ruling would be appealed; it was not clear how swiftly that would occur.
About the Author
