In case you’ve been living under a toupee for the past few months, you’ll know that America’s version of Alan Sugar is now president of the US, which is obviously a terrifying thing for pretty much everybody involved (which is everybody). One recent reason why this is true was him deciding it would be a good idea to impose a temporary travel ban on seven mostly-Muslim countries.
Thankfully, this ban was suspended by some actual adults, and potential order was restored. That was, until Trump decided he’d appeal and take the whole sorry mess to court.
No worry though, three federal judges from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals have unanimously rejected his appeal, and as a result, he’s thrown his billion dollar toys out of his pram:
SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 9, 2017
Of course, him screaming that (we assume he’s screaming BECAUSE OF THE CAPS) seems a tad redundant seeing as he’s already taken them to court and lost, but of course he fails to understand this concept of being in the wrong.
So enter, then, Hillary Clinton, his old rival using her own Twitter account to make a sassy reponse. Respect, Hils.
3-0— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) February 10, 2017
The rest of Twitter also agree with the ridiculousness:
I’LL SEE YOU IN COURT, COURT— Mikey Neumann (@mikeyface) February 10, 2017
Telling Judges "I'll see you in court" is like telling Batman "I'll see you in a dark alley."— Scott Kurtz (@pvponline) February 10, 2017
Me when Bury New Rd McDonalds tell me I'm too late for breakfast https://t.co/PsY0D8kQvK— Nooruddean (@BeardedGenius) February 9, 2017
"See you in court" is not much of a threat to, you know, the judiciary. pic.twitter.com/2Tf0DvJjjH— Stig Abell (@StigAbell) February 10, 2017
"I'LL SEE YOU IN COURT," is the text message you send at 3am, after having waited up patiently for the Easy D— Helena Fitzgerald (@helfitzgerald) February 10, 2017
In spite of this good news, there’s unfortunately still the remnants of Trump’s grubby fingertips on the US borders – the rejection did not affect the cap on refugees that reduced the number allowed into the country from 110,000 to 50,000.
So what happens now? Well, unfortunately because maniacs exist, local law enforcement have had to increase protection for the judges involved, and Trump isn’t going to take it lying down – he’ll try his best to thrust this towards the supreme court. He’s also mentioned that he’ll plant the blame firmly on the judiciary should there be any attacks while the ban isn’t in effect.
If Trump persists, there’s the chance it’ll end up facing another decision in a divided court, potentially populated by someone on Trump’s side, which is obviously a big UH-OH. Similarly, he could also take it to the full Court Of Appeals, which means it would end up in the hands of eleven judges instead of three, which to Trump, would obviously be better odds.
Failing all of that, he could simply backtrack and end up challenging the original judge who opposed the order in the first place, which was only temporary anyway. A permanent injunction is potentially around the corner, but Trump will have another chance to appeal against that.
If none of this works, which could easily (and hopefully) happen, there’s always the chance that Don could simply rewrite the whole thing and make it a tad more lenient, whilst still remaining not-so-secretly racist. Showing a bit of restraint will unfortunately give him a better chance at succeeding. Still, at least there’s a bit of progress here – it seems there’s a couple of trusty no-men still looking out for the greater good across the pond. It’s best to cross your fingers and put faith in them for the time being. Either way, it’s not the end of the world just yet.