This is how politicised the US judiciary is

26travelban-superjumbo.jpgAdmittedly, there may be many good reasons to be critical of new US President Trump (as this blog has pointed out already during his election campaign), or of his planned immigration policy. But the true problem of the US is not the President. The problem is the judiciary.

This is from yesterday’s New York Times:

A federal appeals court refused Thursday to reinstate President Trump’s revised travel ban, saying it “drips with religious intolerance, animus and discrimination.” Continue reading

Prominent Jesuit: the Pope is wrong on Islam, but Viktor Orbán is right…

photoThe well-known Jesuit Henri Boulad, former Provincial of the Jesuits in Egypt and director of the Jesuit Cultural Center in Alexandria, has a life-long experience of what it means to live as a non-Muslim in a predominantly Islamic country. A few weeks ago, he has accepted Hungarian citizenship in order to support the restrictive migration policy of the Hungarian head of government, Viktor Orbán, and to exert a corresponding influence on the European immigration policy.  Continue reading

US: reckless judicial activism derails rule of law

There are many reasons to doubt the wisdom of President Trump’s decree restricting immigration from a number of predominantly Muslim countries – both in its initial version of end January and in its revised version. However, the decisions issued by Federal Judges in Hawaii and Maryland yesterday to block the revised decree from coming into force say more about those judges than about the decree. And they undermine the judiciary branch’s credibility  rather than the President’s.  Continue reading

Hungary determined not to comply with controversial ECtHR asylum judgment

The European Court of Human Rights continues undermining its own prestige and authority – this time with a controversial judgment condemning Hungary for having illegally “detained” two asylum seekers from Bangladesh in the transit zone next to the country’s border to neighbouring Serbia. The judgement is not yet final, as Hungary can still ask for the referral of the case to a Grand Chamber. The Hungarian government, which has criticised the Decision in sharp words, is expected to ask for such referral, but very possibly will not comply with the Decision anyway, even if it should be confirmed. Continue reading

CJEU: Member States not obliged to grant “humanitarian visas”

In the case of  X and X v. Belgium, the European Court of Justice has ruled that EU Member States’ embassies and consulates do not have an obligation to grant so-called “humanitarian visas” to people who claim to be in danger of being persecuted in their countries of origin. With this decision, the Court has overruled the legal opinion issued by its Advocate General  Paolo Mengozzi.
Continue reading