ACLU Lawyer Admits Trump's Travel Ban ‘Could Be Constitutional’ if Enacted by Hillary Clinton

Monday, while the media zeroed in on the Sally Yates/James Clapper testimony before Senate Judiciary’s Subcommittee and their own elation over the French election results, quietly the first appeal hearing of the Trump's blocked travel ban began arguments in the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in Virginia. During questioning an ACLU attorney arguing against the ban showed how politicized and a sham our judicial system has become in the hands of democrat appointed judicial activist on the bench following their own version of Blind Justice....... 

NKT - ACLU Lawyer Omar Jadwat, arguing against President Trump’s travel ban before the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday, admitted that the same exact travel ban “could be” constitutional if it were enacted by Hillary Clinton.

Jadwat argued that Trump’s campaign animus motivated the order, making it illegitimate. This claim was challenged by the Fourth Circuit’s Judge Paul Niemeyer.

“If a different candidate had won the election and then issued this order, I gather you wouldn’t have any problem with that?”

Jadwat dodged on directly answering the question at first, but Niemeyer persisted. Jadwat again tried to avoid the question, asking for clarification on the hypothetical, but Niemeyer once again demanded an answer.

“We have a candidate who won the presidency, some candidate other than President Trump won the presidency and then chose to issue this particular order, with whatever counsel they took. Do I understand that just in that circumstance, the executive order should be honored?”

Jadwat admitted:

“Yes, your honor, I think in that case, it could be constitutional.” - Video  

Jadwat also denied that presidents’ actions should be nullified by campaign statements, despite the fact that his entire argument seemed to rest on that claim. He also tried to claim that the order was illegitimate due to its being “unprecedented,” but this point also crumbled under a quick cross-examination.

_____________________________________________________

Unprecedented? Amazingly enough, the ACLU still repeats that lie in court.  A quick key word search for "President" in the US Code brings you to the section pertaining to the legality of the executive order.  And take note that nowhere does it say "Except Donald Trump"........

8 USC 1182-Section 10: Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

(f) "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline."

Thank You MJA and Larwyn's Linx for the Linkage!