Alan Dershowitz is a liberal’s liberal.
A renowned attorney at Harvard Law, Dershowitz has staked a claim as one of the most left-leaning constitutional experts in the country.
And now his fellow liberals are fuming at his latest prediction.
After pointing out that the injunctions by several federal judges on Trump’s refugee ban are ridiculous, he’s predicting the Supreme Court will ultimately uphold the president’s order.
And now liberals are scrambling to find a way to stop that.
Here’s more from Newsmax:
Federal judges in Maryland and Hawaii who blocked President Donald Trump’s revised travel ban overstepped their bounds by using his campaign rhetoric to justify their rulings, Harvard Law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz said Saturday, and what’s more, he thinks the Supreme Court will uphold the ban.
“I’m putting my reputation on the line,” Dershowitz told Fox News in a morning interview. “I predict if the case gets to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court will uphold the major provisions of this ban.”
That’s because the ban blocks focus more on campaign rhetoric than constitutional law, Dershowitz continued.
“Focusing so heavily on campaign rhetoric and essentially saying, ‘look, if Obama had issued the very same order with it would be constitutional, but if Trump issues it it’s unconstitutional because he said some things about Muslims in the run-up to the campaign or Rudy Giuliani said some things and other people said some things,’ that’s not the way the law is supposed to operate,” Dershowitz explained.
Dershowitz said he believes the Justice Department under Trump is “getting smart,” as it is not filing its appeals to the Ninth Circuit court district, where it will likely get an adverse ruling, but to the Fourth Circuit, a “much more conservative court” that would be more likely to uphold the travel ban.
And if the case makes it to the Supreme Court, Trump will likely win his case, as the vote would be split 4-4, said Dershowitz.
Meanwhile, Dershowitz said he believes the courts, in ruling against both of Trump’s travel bans, are performing psychoanalysis, not constitutional analysis.
“There is precedent in extreme cases, where legislators in an in enacting a statute say things that you can look to the legislative intent,” said Dershowitz. “I have never heard of a case where the rhetoric of a candidate, ambiguous rhetoric to be sure.”
He also said he does not believe the ban is a Muslim ban, but rather focuses on countries like Iran, “the greatest exporter of terrorism.”
“Not only no vetting, but it sends terrorists out in order to kill Americans,” said Dershowitz. “Iran has so much blood on its hands of Americans and American allies, to exclude a country like Iran from the list would be absurd.”