I've been a lawyer since January 1984. I wrote a doctoral dissertation on constitutional interpretation. I've been teaching Philosophy of Law for nearly three decades. The idea that Donald Trump's statements during the 2016 presidential campaign are relevant to the constitutionality of his recent executive order on immigration is preposterous. See here. The Supreme Court of the United States will almost certainly reverse the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Addendum: Remember when Chief Justice John Roberts interpreted ObamaCare's mandate as a tax, so that the legislation would pass constitutional muster? There was plenty of evidence that Barack Obama and others in his administration considered the mandate a mandate and not a tax. Justice Roberts didn't impute a bad motive to Obama and strike down his legislation; he imputed a good motive and upheld it. This is what judges, as judges, do: ask whether there is any construction of the legislation in which it comports with the Constitution. If there is, then the legislation is upheld. Leftist judges are turning this judicial rule on its head by imputing the worst motives to President Trump. It's disgraceful. These "judges" are partisan hacks masquerading as judges. Once President Trump gets one or more additional Supreme Court appointments, this partisanship will cease. The Supreme Court will lay down the law to the lawless judges on inferior courts.
