wave that began with roe v. wade. this latest decision as maya pointed out also, seems to be wildly inconsistent with the gay rights decision recently from colorado in which case they specifically looked at the intent of one of the commissioners who decided the case against the plaintiff, discriminatory intent, and said there the baker doesn t have to make the cake. and in this case they refused to look at the president s clear intent to discriminate against muslims, which he proclaimed time and time again. so, maya, to your point about the rewriting of your executive order three times does not remove the original intent. it seems to have removed it for the majority of the justices. well, this is what s interesting and important about the dissent from justice fryer
if you take the rhetorical context out? well, it s an absurd hypothetical because no other president has ever issued order like this. and no other president would. the only genuine explanation for what the president has done here is that he was carrying out his campaign promise to ban muslims and, you know, as i think the clip you played indicates and as halle s description indicates, for the president, this is all of one piece, there s no notion that, you know, suddenly he abandoned his desire to ban muslims, woke up one day, the agencies happened to present him with a plan that exactly matched his desires through the product of completely neutral analysis, and then he put it into effect by signing the order. that s not what happened, everyone knows that s not what happened. and the court, i think, by endorsing the view that maybe
this is not surprising. he was pushing into hate and he used it to his advantage and a platform to get his campaign moving. he did it with the moment when he talked about mexicans and being rapists and all the way through and talking about black people in front of all white audience and trying to ban muslims. you name it. this is not surprising at all but it is never too late to get involved and have those hard conversations about race. great to see you, thank you both. get the last word tonight. the 11th hour with my friends william starts right now. tonight steve bannon is out. democrats are now getting to wonder if the nation s most prominent nationalists are dangerous inside or the outside. the fallout continues from charlottesville, the revolvering door of the trump s white house swings again as the president now without the core group
this #grandparentsnotterrorists because we wanted to put a human face on this issue and show the world that these individuals are not terrorists, they are our loved ones, our grandparents, our cousins, and we wanted to show that this really isn t doing anything to make america safer. the one thing that it is doing is fulfilling trump s campaign promise to ban muslims. and as you said, yes, my uncle was personally impacted by this. my husband and i were married this past may, and we were really hoping that my uncle could make it to our wedding from iran, but unfortunately, when he got his letter inviting him to his visa interview, it was just when the muslim ban had hit and it really impeded his process in getting into the united states on time. this is just heart wrenching for so many different families all across america. i remember when this muslim ban first came down, and i was at los angeles international airport, it s just heartbreaking on an individual level to see the specific
this with our panel i want to look back at how we got here. donald j. trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of muslims entering the united states until our country s representatives can figure out what the hell is going on. this is the protection of the nation from foreign terrorists entering into the united states. airports across the country, crowded with demonstrators saturday night. no fear, refugees are welcome here. do you feel like you and your staff there you re in control of events at the white house? to say we re in control is a substantial understatement. we have equal branches of government in this country. the judiciary is not supreme. there s no such thing as judicial supremacy. what the judges did both at the ninth and at the district level was to take power for themselves, that belongs squarely in the hands of the