The 9th Circuit appeals court's decision on President Donald Trump's travel ban was "laughable" as there was no "specific person with a specific injury" involved, MSNBC's Joe Scarborough said Friday.
"They ignored the ruling law," the "Morning Joe" anchor said on his show. "They just as a matter of course gave the state of Washington standing. There's no specific person with a specific injury that is specifically going to be addressed by this action, which usually is how you get standing. The 9th decided not to last night."
Further, said Scarborough, the decision "radically extended the rights beyond mere green card holders and did something the Supreme Court has never done and extended this to potentially possible new claims for immigrants."
The court's three judges also did not talk about the statute that gives a president power to pass an executive order on immigration, said Scarborough, which is "what you examine to see if he has gone beyond the boundaries."
This, he said, "would be like the court taking a free speech case and not talking about the First Amendment. It was preposterous."
Scarborough insisted that he is "deeply offended" by Trump's executive order and how it was rolled out, as it was a "nightmare" since it was implemented. However, he said the White House will likely revise its order and "do a couple of quick changes and take care of these problems."
In its decision, the Ninth Circuit's judges said the government has not pointed to evidence that immigrants from the seven countries named in Trump's order have perpetrated a terrorist attack, Scarborough continued, "as if it is the executive branch's job to actually get the intel community in and say these are all of the things that are going to happen," Scarborough continued.
Meanwhile, former President Barack Obama worked with a bipartisan Congress to list the seven countries — Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen — as terror threats for a previous visa waiver order, but not because there were specific attacks, Scarborough said.
"They saw a deteriorating security situation that they wanted to remedy," he said. "They wanted to prevent attacks. That's the entire purpose of that."
Scarborough also took offense that the court used Trump's early campaign statements about enacting a Muslim ban, which he changed later to say his call was not for banning Muslims, but instead about extreme vetting.
"Everybody can debate Donald Trump and his psychology and why he did that. A court cannot go back to a previous statement and drag it in and use that as the intent of an order," he commented.
Sandy Fitzgerald ✉
Sandy Fitzgerald has more than three decades in journalism and serves as a general assignment writer for Newsmax covering news, media, and politics.
© 2023 Newsmax. All rights reserved.