After a number of liberal judges blocked his first travel ban, President Trump has finally had some judicial support from a Federal Judge in Virginia.
President Trump’s limited and temporary travel “ban” for refugees and immigrants was today deemed different enough from the first to be withheld, and worthy of further deliberation according to U.S. District Court Judge Anthony Trenga.
— POLITICO (@politico) March 24, 2017
As reported by Politico:
The substantive revisions reflected in [the second order] have reduced the probative value of the President’s statements to the point that it is no longer likely that Plaintiffs can succeed on their claim that the predominate purpose of EO-2 is to discriminate against Muslims based on their religion and that EO-2 is a pretext or a sham for that purpose,” Trenga wrote in a 32-page opinion.
“In EO-2, the President has provided a detailed justification for the Order based on national security needs, and enjoining the operation of EO-2 would interfere with the President’s unique constitutional responsibilities to conduct international relations, provide for the national defense, and secure the nation,” the judge added.
“This Court is no longer faced with a facially discriminatory order coupled with contemporaneous statements suggesting discriminatory intent. And while the President and his advisors have continued to make statements following the issuance of EO-1 that have characterized or anticipated the nature of EO-2, the Court cannot conclude for the purposes of the Motion that these statements, together with the President’s past statements, have effectively disqualified him from exercising his lawful presidential authority,” the judge wrote.
To put this in perspective, only last week judges in Maryland and Hawaii ruled against the travel ban – this ruling out of Virginia may force the ban to eventually end up before the Supreme Court.
For Trump, this might be some of the best news he’s had this week.