An Open Letter to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte and My Representative in Congress
Dear Chairman Goodlatte:
The Constitution does not run on automatic pilot. It is not a passive guarantee of freedom. The Constitution must be enforced on government officials who violate its provisions.
Article III, Section 1 states that federal judges shall "hold their offices during good behaviour."
Clearly, when Judge James L. Robart of the Western District of Washington enjoined President Trump's Executive Order 13,769 in violation of the clear language of the Constitution, the laws passed by Congress, the rulings of the Supreme Court and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure he also violated the "good behavior" provision of Article III of the Constitution.
The Constitution offers a clear path to enforcing its division of authority upon a power grabbing judiciary: Impeachment.
And to that end we offer the following four initial counts in articles of impeachment against Federal District Judge James L. Robart of the Western District of Washington.
1. Judge James Robart ignored the Constitution, statute and case law and substituted his personal whim to justify his arbitrary and capricious ruling restraining the President’s Executive Order 13,769. Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 of the Constitution and unanimous case law since our Founding gives Congress plenary power over immigration and the authority to delegate power to the executive specifically to reduce immigration. The president also has war powers to shut off immigration from states whose citizens present a clear and present danger to the national security of the United States.
2. By finding that President Trump’s Executive Order 13,769 imposed an unconstitutional religious test on potential refugees Judge James Robart ignored the plain language of Section 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(42)(A) and substituted his personal whim for the laws passed by Congress:
The term “refugee” means (A) any person who is outside any country of such person’s nationality … and who is unable or unwilling to return to … that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of … religion.
3. In enjoining President Trump’s Executive Order 13,769 Judge Robart ignored the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including Rule 65(b)(2) that requires a court to “describe the injury” suffered by the plaintiff. Robart’s order claimed that Washington and Minnesota had carried their burden of showing they had a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of their lawsuit, but never explained which of the States’ claims were likely to succeed.
4. In enjoining President Trump’s Executive Order 13,769 Judge Robart took upon himself legislative power reserved to Congress and created new rights for aliens that Congress never intended, specifically he created a right to enter or re-enter the United States. Through statue and longstanding case law visa holders have no property or liberty interest in those visas and thus no due process claim with respect to the revocation of visa contemplated by the Executive Order.
For these, and other violations that will be revealed in an impeachment investigation, we demand that you, as Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, immediately schedule a hearing to begin impeachment proceedings against Judge James L. Robart of the Western District of Washington.
After you sign, use the "share" options on the top right of the next screen to send this letter to all of your contacts on Facebook, Twitter, e-mail and more!