well, they did send a very clear message with the unanimous opinion. and then the decision in the district court. i wish he would listen to it. we need a rational, cool-headed logic. the logic is that they did not present evidence that this was this the interest of national security at all. they just kind of wanted to ignore the court and says that the presidency has somehow become royalty. and the court said look, we can t find a rational basis for what you have done here. so i wish the president would reconsider this. if he doesn t, our state is going to keep fighting for our rights. and i m proud our state is the finish one to do it in the country. okay, governor. thank you so much for being with us. thank you. obviously this is not the end of the legal battle. but it is just the first step. governor inslee, thank you for being was. we re ready, we re ready. well, still to come here on cnn newsroom, white house
that as you re going about writing these executive orders, you have to be concerned about whether they are going to withstand any kind of a challenge in terms of violations of the constitution. in this case the court was pretty clear, although it didn t get to the merit, pretty clear this one would not withstand that kind of scrutiny. again, it did not deal with the most controversial issue here, whether or not the travel ban is in fact a muslim ban, which would violate the constitution. why did they sort of sidestep that? the court didn t have to get to that. the question before this court was whether this ban should the stay that has been issued by the federal court in seattle, whether that stay should have been lifted. that was really the only question before the court. now a coupe of things can happen. this case will go back to the traffic report for a full trial on the merits. and that trial will entail depositions, discovery, and opportunity for each side to present the kin
whether the government could ever prove that the ban would withstand constitutional scrutiny. the question of whether 5th amendment due process rights were violated for the people who were affected by the ban, the court talked about that extensively and said in fact that the states that have challenged the ban are more likely to prevail on the constitutional claim. and the court did something else. the court really took the trump administration to task. donald trump has been saying throughout this entire process that the country s national security is at stake. and the court said, look, you have not presented any evidence to support the claim of urgency, to support the claim that there is some threat to americans or to our national security. and the court said you could have done that. we re accustomed to receiving classified information. so if there is information to support your claim, then present it. and the trump administration has not done that. and the court quite frankly
court could not review evidence about that. he louisiana on that. when the court asked him if he could provide evidence that there was really a national security benefit of his executive order, he could not produce any evidence. in fact, we produced lots of evidence that actually damages national security. he lost on that. so he lost on multiple of the issues that were before us. i think the important part of this is twofold. number one, it does restore our faith in the checks and balance system, which is so important in this country. and secondly, we have four judges. we had four judges review this now. one in the district court. four in the circuit court. half of them were appointed by bush. they re bush appointees. they re appointed by republican presidents, unanimously confirmed in judge robard s case. these are solid decisions. and we expect the president to respect the judicial system and follow these orders to the tee.
at this point. so we ll see. does this mean donald trump will be sworn, has to give sworn testimony? the people that were involved in creating this executive order, will they be subjected to depositions and other forms of discovery? but obviously this case isn t over. donald trump tweeted right after the decision came out and said on national television, we ll you in court. which is kind of ironic, since already two federal courts have ruled against him. but of course he has threatened to take this all the way to the supreme court, which from what we know about the court, not likely that he will be successful even at this level. okay, areva, good to see you. more on the politics of this from democratic strategist robin swanson and cnn political commentator john phillips who is a trump supporter. we just have to keep reminding our audience of that. areva mentioned this. shortly after the ruling the president tweeted out see you