The logical extension of this reasoning about the supposed “motive” behind the executive order, based on statements made by Trump and others during a campaign, is that the order is unlawful because Trump signed it. Yet the same exact order would not be unlawful if Obama had signed it.
This goes against a basic principle of sound jurisprudence that Chief Justice Earl Warren voiced in U.S. v. O’Brien (1968) when he wrote, “This Court will not strike down an otherwise constitutional statute on the basis of an alleged illicit legislative motive.” (http://dailysignal.com/2017/03/16/what-2-obama-judges-got-wrong-in-striking-down-travel-executive-order/)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2017-03-17 12:32 am (UTC)This goes against a basic principle of sound jurisprudence that Chief Justice Earl Warren voiced in U.S. v. O’Brien (1968) when he wrote, “This Court will not strike down an otherwise constitutional statute on the basis of an alleged illicit legislative motive.” (http://dailysignal.com/2017/03/16/what-2-obama-judges-got-wrong-in-striking-down-travel-executive-order/)