Three times this year imbecilic partisan judges struck down an executive order by President Trump restricting immigration from failed states and a state sponsor of terrorism. They used the novel theory that anything a candidate says on the campaign trail can be used as evidence despite existing law and the documentary evidence supporting the decision. We should probably be thankful that Trump wasn’t promising a chicken in every pot or if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor. The last round of challenges resulted in this tortuous logic:

“A nationality-based travel ban against eight nations consisting of over 150 million people is unprecedented,” wrote Judge Theodore D. Chuang of the Federal District Court in Maryland. Citing statements from Mr. Trump, some made as a presidential candidate and some more recent, Judge Chuang found that the new proclamation was tainted by religious animus and most likely violated the Constitution’s prohibition of government establishment of religion.

Similarly, Judge Derrick K. Watson of the Federal District Court in Honolulu found that the September proclamation “suffers from precisely the same maladies as its predecessor,” adding that it “plainly discriminates based on nationality” in violation of federal law “and the founding principles of this nation.”

Apparently the moron in Hawaii never heard of the Chinese or Japanese exclusion laws and doesn’t realize that Korematsu is still the law of the land.

Well, third time is the charm. Today, the Supreme Court stepped in and slapped down the latest craziness:

The Supreme Court on Monday allowed the third version of the Trump administration’s travel ban to go into effect while legal challenges against it continue. The decision was a victory for the administration after its mixed success before the court over the summer, when justices considered and eventually dismissed disputes over the second version.

The court’s brief, unsigned orders on Monday urged appeals courts to move swiftly to determine whether the latest ban was lawful. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor said they would have denied the administration’s request to allow the latest ban to go into effect.

The court’s orders mean that the administration can fully enforce its new restrictions on travel from eight nations, six of them predominantly Muslim. For now, most citizens of Iran, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Chad and North Korea will be barred from entering the United States, along with some groups of people from Venezuela.

The restrictions vary in their details, but in most cases, citizens of the countries will be unable to emigrate to the United States permanently and many will be barred from working, studying or vacationing here.

By totally sweeping aside the court injunctions, the Supreme Court is signaling that the administration has a very, very good chance of prevailing.

In a very few years from now, this whole shameful sideshow of unelected judges taking upon themselves the right to set policy without accountability and to place perhaps thousands of Americans at risk without any responsibility will be marveled at. Right now it is so fashionable to be part of the Resistance that no one really cares about the violence these people are doing to the rule of law.