The Government has pointed to no evidence
Go to page 26. Read:
The Government has not shown that a stay is necessary to avoid irreparable injury. Nken, 556 U.S. at 434. Although we agree that “the Government’s interest in combating terrorism is an urgent objective of the highest order,” Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, 561 U.S. 1, 28 (2010), the Government has done little more than reiterate that fact. Despite the district court’s and our own repeated invitations to explain the urgent need for the Executive Order to be placed immediately into effect, the Government submitted no evidence to rebut the States’ argument that the district court’s order merely returned the nation temporarily to the position it has occupied for many previous years.
The Government has pointed to no evidence that any alien from any of the countries named in the Order has perpetrated a terrorist attack in the United States.7 Rather than present evidence to explain the need for the Executive Order, the Government has taken the position that we must not review its decision at all.8 We disagree, as explained above.
Just imagine – they want explanations and evidence. It’s almost as if we don’t live under an absolute ruler after all. It’s almost as if we’re a nation of laws, not of overbearing tv personalities.
So Donny’s fevered imagination doesn’t count as evidence? Well, apart from evidence of his own mental state, of course.
Here are a few of my favorite things…
Checks.
Balances.
;-)
That (8) is in the text leads to a truly amazing footnote. You should check it in the full version, but in short: The government argued that the courts did not see the super secret classified information which the government sees, and so the court could not judge what the government was doing. The court notes that courts are shown classified material _routinely_, they _routinely_ keep it confidential, and there are rules and regulations regarding how this is done (followed by cites to a bunch of cases, precedents and regulations). The language is factual and lawyerly throughout; the tone is one of utter contempt for the incompetent bozos who pled the government’s case.
On pp 21-22, it is shown that li’l Donnie n’ cohort have no clue what they are doing. The administration said in court that, since the White House counsel had issued “authoritative guidance,” everything’s cool. The court replied, basically, “Who the hell cares what the White House counsel has to say?”