Issue link: http://www.epageflip.net/i/786498
ChipThompson, Editor How to have your say: Letters must be signed and provide the writer's home street address and home phone number. Anonymous letters, open letters to others, pen names and petition-style letters will not be allowed. Letters should be typed and no more than two double-spaced pages or 500words. When several letters address the same issue, a cross section will be published. Email: editor@ redbluffdailynews.com Fax: 530-527-9251 Mail to: Daily News 728Main St., Red Bluff, CA 96080 Facebook: Leave comments at FACEBOOK.COM/ RBDAILYNEWS Twitter: Follow and send tweets to @REDBLUFFNEWS NomatterhowtheNinth Circuit rules on President Donald Trump's poorly con- ceived and even more poorly ex- ecuted ban on travel from seven Muslim- majority coun- tries, one fact has been laid completely bare: The cur- rent occupant of the White House has no respect, and even less understanding, of the Constitutionally man- dated separation of powers between the branches of gov- ernment. On Wednesday, Trump called opposition to his ban "disgraceful," and said a "bad high school student would understand" that he was within his rights to im- pose it. Mr. Trump must have been an atrocious student, then, because even that same bad student would un- derstand that the judiciary has the constitutional obli- gation to hear challenges to federal law and to rule on those challenges. Trump's contempt for the judiciary has been on dis- play since his days as a can- didate. And his long history of legal entanglements while in private life has been thor- oughly documented. Last year, he attacked the credibility and questioned the impartiality of Indi- ana-born U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel. Curiel who is of Mexican descent, was hearing a civil case against Trump at the time. Last weekend, Trump went after U.S. District Judge James Robart, after the George W. Bush appoin- tee temporarily stayed the ban in advance of an intense hearing by the 9th Circuit on Tuesday. "Just cannot believe a judge would put our coun- try in such peril," Trump tweeted. "If something hap- pens blame him and court system. People pouring in. Bad!" Trump dismissed Robart as a "so-called judge," whose "ridiculous ruling," will be overturned. At this writing, that may yet be the case. But it might also be just a stopping-off point. As Bloomberg News notes, it's more than likely that the fight over Trump's travel ban will land in the laps of a still short-handed U.S. Supreme Court sooner rather than later. There have been some who have tried to equate Trump's broadside against Robart to former President Barack Obama's admittedly graceless State of the Union attack on the Supreme Court justices seated before him over the Citizens United decision. They are pushing a false equivalency. And for the good of the record, here, from The Washington Post, is precisely what Obama said: "With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court re- versed a century of law that, I believe, will open the flood- gates for special interests, in- cluding foreign corporations, to spend without limit in our elections," Obama said. "I don't think American elections should be bank- rolled by America's most powerful interests or, worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people. And I urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps correct some of these problems." While Obama criticized the ruling, he never directly attacked the justices, ques- tioned the justices' legiti- macy, nor its right to make such a ruling. As a constitutional law professor, Obama surely knew the bright-line risk such an attack would pose to our democratic institutions. Trump, who is neither law- yer, nor politician, nor sol- dier, nor certainly even vaguely statesman-like, is not bound by such norms. Nor has he evinced any interest in even respecting them. Most functioning adults would accept the temporary setback for what it is — a le- gitimate part of the govern- ment exercising its constitu- tional powers — and grouse with some degree of civility. But for the man-child in the White House, who can only act out in the same way as a fourth-grade tyrant or a toddler denied a snack, Trump only has one mode: attack. And while that might only be merely offensive com- ing from a candidate, com- ing from the President of the United States it sets a dan- gerously destabilizing tone. What might happen if the Supreme Court hands down a ruling that runs counter to the White House's interests? Will Trump and his ultra- nationalist adviser Stephen K. Bannon direct the govern- ment to ignore the court's or- ders? And will Trump's legion of self-styled "deplorables" sim- ply wave their red #MAGA hats in assent and fall blindly into line? Trump's counter-factual rantings about "bad peo- ple" flooding into the coun- try disregard, once again, the reality that refugees seeking entry to the United States are the mostly strictly screened of all potential en- trants, going through a pro- cess that can take years to complete. Let's be clear — no one's saying that Amer- ica, through the broad pow- ers vested in the executive, doesn't have the right to se- cure its borders and to en- sure that potential overseas threats are kept at bay. But what Trump did — and the way he went about it — makes clear that the ad- ministration's travel ban was a poor piece of policy from start to finish. Keeping a campaign promise is one thing — keep- ing it at the expense of our values and laws is another matter entirely. An award-winning political journalist, John Micek is the Opinion Editor and Political Columnist for PennLive/The Patriot-News in Harrisburg, Pa. Readers may follow him on Twitter @ByJohnLMicek and email him at jmicek@ pennlive.com. JohnMicek Trump declares war on the judiciary Cartoonist's take For our nation to achieve re- spectful debate: 1) partisans on the Democrat left must check their emotions and allow that President Trump and his support- ers have Ameri- ca's best interests in mind while we sincerely dis- agree on the path to that goal; 2) the losing side of this massive political debate must accept the weight of public opinion— as expressed in the rejection of Democrats for over a dozen state governors, many dozens of House and Senate seats, nearly a thousand state elective offices, and the Electoral College elec- tion of Trump; And 3) liberal advocates must accept "alternative facts" that don't support their preferred narrative (the legal and scien- tific fields are endlessly weigh- ing conflicting, supporting, contrary, testimonial and lab- oratory "facts" in pursuing the truth). In the case of Trump's immigration orders, I have to say that facts support Trump, not the courts or his detractors. All of those contentious points are involved in the raging debate over President Trump's orders. Solid majorities of Amer- icans, and almost all conserva- tives and Republicans, support building a wall or fence along our southern border (where practical). Most prominent Dem- ocrats signed a bill in 2006 to construct such barriers over 800 miles of our border with Mexico. Only the Democrat fringe (and business owners dependent on cheap, illegal labor) think borders don't matter and being in America legally is irrelevant. Witness their support for the lu- nacy of "sanctuary" cities—they only exist to harbor and protect criminal aliens from the INS. Most Americans support Trump's (and Obama's and most recent president's) restrictions on nations that can't prove that their immigrants pose no threat. Before the Democrat/media on- slaught and hysteria seeped into malleable voters' minds, Ras- mussen Reports found (Jan. 30) that "Most voters approve of President Trump's tempo- rary halt to refugees and visitors (from targeted nations) until the government can do a better job of keeping out individuals who are terrorist threats." The sup- port was almost twice (57%) the level of opposition (33%); de- luded Democrats think other- wise. As of last Thursday, mobs of protesters in Arizona were ob- structing immigration officers engaged in the lawful detention and transportation of a female illegal alien who was convicted of felony impersonation by us- ing a fake social security num- ber in 2009; she was ordered re- moved in 2013. You might have heard that over decades she was a wife, mother and otherwise good person. While that may provide disingenuous fodder for the "Not One More Deportation" crowd (written on signs of pro- testers), it illustrates what utter contempt for the law you find on the left. Much accurate, insightful commentary can be found at donpolson.blogspot.com under the "immigration" label. Also, look up "Trump's radical immi- gration plan: Enforce the law," "Trump's executive order will make America safe again," and "A fact-free debate on Trump's executive order," all at Washing- tonExaminer.com. More on that theme: "Trump's immigration order: Myths and realities" by Paul Mirengoff and David French; Don Surber's "Media in fact- free fall over immigration" (He shows the infamous photo of Clinton's SWAT officers remov- ing Cuban refugee Elian Gonza- les from his home at gunpoint); "Most claims about Trump's visa Executive Order are false or misleading" by William A. Jacobson at Legalinsurrection. com; and "Obama's administra- tion made the 'Muslim ban' pos- sible and the media won't tell you," by Seth Frantzman. Frantzman: "So where are the seven nations [they're not in Trump's order]? Where is the 'Muslim ban'? It turns out this was a form of 'fake news,' or 'al- ternative facts.' Trump didn't select seven Muslim-majority countries. US President Barack Obama's administration se- lected these seven Muslim-ma- jority countries. "The Department of Home- land Security targeted these seven countries over the last years as countries of concern." DHS selected the countries, Congress wrote the legislation and Obama signed the Terror- ist Travel Protection Act of 2015 as part of the Omnibus Appro- priations Act of FY2016. The origin of the seven countries also puts to the lie accusations that Trump avoided nations where he has business interests. Worldwide, only 12 percent of all Muslims are affected. News media have labored mightily to create "fake news" narratives of fear—as the im- petus for Trump's order (that argument would apply to Obama). Trump is not trying to make Americans afraid of immigrants (we welcome im- migrants when they truly de- sire to forsake anti-American beliefs and assimilate to our values). Trump is not creating fear of Muslims who also re- ject anti-American beliefs and wish to assimilate. Shariah-ad- hering Muslims should, how- ever, be rejected. In America, the Constitution, women and homosexuals are not inferior or 2nd class. This all should show the Fitzsimmons' cartoon (pub- lished on this page)—the Statue of Liberty waving a torch la- beled "Fear Itself" holding off the world's immigrants—to be the reflection of a rabid parti- san hack posing as a cartoonist who cares not for facts. Judge Robart asked "How many arrests have there been for those seven countries since 9/11?" "None, as best I can tell" he answered himself. Byron York: "It turns out that (every- one) repeating the talking point had it wrong. Last year the Sen- ate Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration…(proved) that at least 70 people born in the seven countries had been con- victed—not just arrested, but convicted—of terror-related of- fenses in the U.S. since 9/11. And that number did not in- clude more recent cases like Ab- dul Artan, a Somali refugee who wounded 11 people during a machete attack on the cam- pus of Ohio State University." Trump should add, not cut, na- tions; judges should recognize that Trump has unassailable power to exclude immigrants. Don Polson has called Red Bluff home since 1988. He can be reached by e-mail at donplsn@ yahoo.com. The way I see it Phony attacks on Trump's order Trump's counter- factual rantings about "bad people" flooding into the country disregard, once again, the reality that refugees seeking entry to the United States are the mostly strictly screened of all potential entrants, going through a process that can take years to complete. Sounding off A look at what readers are saying in comments on our website and on social media. So in other words they're going to erode the opposite side of the dam, emergency over flow side of the dam. Crazy. Hope everyone stays safe and gets out harm's way. James Touros: On Lake Oroville spilling over alternate spillway due to main spillway damage There needs to be about 5more stop signs on those roads. Too many uncontrolled intersections in that area and too many terrible drivers. Alyssa Tenter: On denial of new stop sign at Luning and Second streets in Red Bluff Don Polson John L. Micek OPINION » redbluffdailynews.com Tuesday, February 14, 2017 » MORE AT FACEBOOK.COM/RBDAILYNEWS AND TWITTER.COM/REDBLUFFNEWS A6