tell me about the legal issue. is he right that if you can s w show the ban was against all muslims. not just extreme or radical. in the campaign, as you pointed out, i wrote an article saying i thought that was ridiculous. is that evidence this was no, it s not. what he was talking about is something directed at the safety of the united states to prevent terrorist attacks. he was not talking about discriminating against the muslim religion. i think that s pretty clear even in the extreme statements he made during the campaign. the notion that somehow this is the business of courts is just false. the 9th circuit said there s no precedent to support the claim this was not reviewable which runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy. you can practically see the announcer break out in goose bumps when they read that.
donald trump campaigned on an anti-muslim slogan. having been told he couldn t leave all muslims out, he asked rudy giuliani to put lipstick on the pig and what we end up with is still a pig. michael mukasey, what do you make of that decision? it was wrong on just about every count that it decided. starting with giving standing to the states of washington and minnesota to represent the quote rights of people who have no rights. that is aliens overseas who have no connection with this country. what the 9th circuit said if is states, universities made arrangements with students or lecturers to come here then they had a third party right to defend the rights of those people. that assume the people have a right to come here in the first place. the universities cannot confer rights upon aliens and there was
hearing before the 9th circuit was sending a signal to muslims all over the world and the united states that they are not welcome here. as your guests in the last segment indicated, far from protecting us from terror. that made it harder for us to work with people in countries like iraq and became essentially an advertisement for isis recruiting. i think we re much better off now that that ban has been stayed and is not going to quickly be reinstated. let me ask you on the specific question, all that may be unwise. why is it unconstitutional? why does the president not have the authority to do something that might be bad foreign policy? well, of course, what makes it unconstitutional is not that it s bad foreign policy, that wouldn t suffice. it s the first amendment to the u.s. constitution that says the
this country and also said about the ninth circuit court, you know, that any high schooler should have been able to determine it. they did more than that. they were saying, you know, the ninth circuit needs to be broken up. it s way too big it operates 20% of the population of this timing and he said i don t want to call the courts biased but he then said these courts are so political which is exactly that. something else. the conservative supporters of the president on this issue also are the first to thump their chests and regard themselves as strict constructionists or originalists. if you really are a strict constructionist or originalist you need to respect the third branch of government and the
same thing back to republicans would be hypocrisy so i said he deserves a hearing. the hearing that judge garland never got. that allows my constituents to hear his background, experience and constitutional philosophy and i think we should have that hearing on the judiciary committee. after that i think we should see but i don t agree that we should simply refuse to even consider his nomination. very quickly, i heard you just called the travel ban from mr. trump illegal. it doesn t sound based on the oral argument that the 9th circuit court thought this was an open and shut case. i think it is an arguable case as are so many but as i looked at the details of how it was prepared and how it was implemented and what the impacts will be i think it goes against the immigration and naturalization act because it does discriminate based on nationality and religion and the way it was implemented shows it violates at least the spirit if