Your Mouth and Mind are in Need of Soaping, Mr. President!

It’s one thing to disagree with someone's opinions or decisions. It’s another to be disrespectful and to show disdain for them, particularly when that person is in a position of high responsibility and who did nothing to merit such treatment.

Yet, that is exactly what the President of the United States did this past weekend, when he slammed the federal judge who temporarily ended U.S. immigration restrictions made in his executive order a week ago.

“The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!” Trump said in an early-Saturday tweet to his 23.6 million followers.

The comment drew a sharp response from Chuck Schumer, the Senate’s top Democrat, who said in a statement that Trump “shows a disdain for an independent judiciary that doesn’t always bend to his wishes and a continued lack of respect for the Constitution.”

U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE JAMES ROBART'S RULING.   In his ruling, Judge Robart said the states of Washington and Minnesota, which brought the case before him, can sue on the grounds that their economies and residents would be harmed by the ban announced a week ago. The ruling eclipsed a Trump administration win earlier on Friday, when a federal judge in Boston refused to extend a temporary ruling blocking enforcement at that city’s airport of the ban on immigrants from 7 countries. Robart, in Seattle, said in his ruling that voiding the president’s order throughout the U.S. was needed for consistency.

Supporting his reasoning that a ruling on immigration policy should apply nationwide, Robart cited a decision by a federal judge in Brownsville, TX, who blocked former President Barack Obama’s executive order allowing more than 4 million undocumented immigrants to remain in the U.S.

The ruling is the most comprehensive legal admonishment of Trump’s executive order prohibiting immigrants, students, temporary workers and others from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Sudan, Somalia, Yemen and Libya from entering the U.S. for 90 days. Judges in Brooklyn, New York, Los Angeles and Alexandria, VA, have issued orders that are less sweeping. The Seattle judge also temporarily set aside Trump’s 120-day ban on refugees from those countries.

The decision by Robart, a 2004 appointee of Republican President George W. Bush whose nomination was approved in a 99-0 Senate vote, carries unique significance because the states were able to link Trump’s edict to its adverse economic impact, said Geoffrey Hoffman, Director, University of Houston Law Center Immigration Clinic. The order’s effect on jobs and economic stability is likely to make the temporary ruling difficult for the president to overturn before the judge considers a permanent injunction, he said.

“The Washington suit is so much more broad than anything else we’ve seen because it goes into the economic interests of the parties -- that’s a very big development.” Hoffman said of a likely appeal by the federal government. “Appeals of temporary orders occur only in very, very extraordinary measures. I doubt it would be successful.”

The State Department has reversed the provisional revocation of visas and individuals with visas that were not physically canceled may now travel if their paperwork is otherwise valid, a spokesman said. It’s unclear what will happen to holders of visas that were physically canceled over the past week.

The White House said in a statement that the Justice Department would file an emergency request at the earliest possible time to freeze the judge’s ruling.

The case is State of Washington v. Trump, 17-cv-00141, U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington (Seattle). The Boston case is Loughghalam v. Trump, 17-cv-10154, U.S. District Court, Massachusetts (Boston).