Talked to his Attorney General yet. Thats right. Reporter i had a chance to catch up with kellyannec conway. I asked her whether or not the president views this decision as some sort of set back or defeat. She didnt exactly answer that question, but heres what she had to say. This is a defeat . Do you see this as a setback . He sees it as the statute provides a president with great latitude and authority to protect the citizens and protect the Nations National security. This was not argued on the merits. Now that well have an opportunity to argue on the merits, we look forward to doing that. I think his tweet was perfect when he said, well see you in court. There you go. Some confidence being expressed by Kellyanne Conway at the white
house. Not a lot new in terms of arguments being laid out by the white house in response to this, just the very tough talk that were going to see you in court. That is not exactly going to win the day at the Supreme Court. I asked Kellyanne Conway, is thi
strong opinion against the trump administration. i really don t i think the insults are a strategic mistake but i m a trial lawyer too. i think at the end of the day facts matter. and i think what the court saw here is there are an intensive vetting process in place. there was no real showing by the administration how this step would in any way actually enhance our safety based on the steps that were being taken. the administration failed to make a factual record that showed at the end of the day they were going to protect us any more than the system in place. professor? you know, look, let s keep in mind that this has been procedural wrangling thus far. i agree with alan i ve never seen any decision by any court that pushes the idea of third party standing this far. usually that s used for individuals who cannot for some pragmatic reason bring their own constitutional claims. that s not the case here.
university case. now, how did he respond to adverse rulings in that case? he attacked the judge, calling him a mexican. but he did ultimately settle. he ultimately settled the case, but his initial reaction is always aggressive fighting back, freigthreatening appeal. he said he hadn t talked to the attorney general. after one of the things that surprised me is that normally when the government loses a case, you get sort of a vanilla statement that says we respect the decision of the court, we re going to look at the decision and decide whether to appeal or not. but the response here was a twitter response. professor foley one of the main arguments from the department of justice was that the president s decisions about immigration when motivated by national security concerns are unreviewable. it says, quote, this is no precedent to support this claimed unreviewability.