Donald Trump says federal judges ruling against his 'Muslim ban' are 'political'
‘Even a bad high school student would understand this’, the President said
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Donald Trump insisted that the Muslim ban was written "perfectly" and the federal judges who oppose it were motivated by politics.
His executive order to ban nearly all travellers from seven Muslim-majority countries, which prompted widespread protests, was temporarily halted after eight days by federal judge James Robart in Seattle.
Mr Trump read out the wording of the executive order to the National Sheriffs' Association on Wednesday morning, insisting it was written clearly. He railed against the opposing judge's arguments.
"I watched last night with amazement and I heard things that I couldn’t believe," said Mr Trump.
"Things that really have nothing to do with what I just read. I don’t want to call the courts bias.
"But courts seem to be so political and it would be so great for our justice system if they would be able to read a statement and do what's right. And that has to do with the security of our country."
The President was angry that his emergency appeal to overturn Judge James Robart’s ruling was denied. He has now threatened to take the case to the Supreme Court.
“A bad high school student would understand this. Anybody would understand this,” he claimed, after reading out the wording of the order to the crowd.
"It’s as plain as you can have it," he added.
"I was a good student. I understand things. I comprehend very well, better than I think almost anybody," he said.
He argued the order was "correct, not politically correct", and it was important for national security, to stop an influx of people who want to "do harm" to the US.
A Cato Institute study found that no Syrian refugee had even been charged with the intent of carrying out a terrorist attack on US soil in more than four decades, and 17 people from the six other countries had been charged with such an intent. No one died as a result of a terrorist attack plotted or carried out by anyone from the seven nations on Mr Trump's hit list.
"It couldn’t have been written any more precisely," said the President. "It’s not like ‘oh gee, we wish it was written better'. It was written beautifully."
A court hearing this week saw a Justice Department lawyer and a federal court lawyer battle it out over the ban and a decision is expected this week.
Regardless of the ruling, the case will likely end up in the nation's highest court.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments