Super Bowl LI Judge Robart and That Executive Order
Even the Super Bowl Ads are now being parsed. For example, in the Washington Post’s Daily 202, courtesy of James Hohmann, a good percentage of the main ads are analyzed and found to be both political and, either subtly or blatantly, critical of President Trump’s executive order on immigration. Aside from the fact that most of these ads have been planned a fair time in advance, it is clear that you can see the current divisions in America wherever you choose to look.
Because the media won't let you not see them. The pundits, the headlines, the commentary: it's all pointing out loudly how violent and angry the mood is. Without spending too much time analyzing who is angry and violent. (hint: they're the ones who didn't vote for the current administration).
How daring would Lady Gaga be? Would she out beyonce Beyonce? Nope. In what was a long (apologies to all you LG fans) and rather gentle (if thumping) attempt to celebrate both unity and diversity in America, her performance was tight and theatrical and not much else. The symbolism was more in the fact that it was her doing the singing. And not, say, The Gatlin Brothers.
And the actual players? Martellus Bennett will pass on the White House reception for the winning team. Brady has been diplomatically quiet about his MAGA hat. And Matt Ryan will have the following months - and likely years - to reflect on what he might have done to have held on to an incredible lead. But the cruelty of the Falcon's loss is why we watch professional sports. Amazing games have to include unbelievable heartbreak. No heartbreak. No amazing.
But it is also incredible that the actual coverage of what will be considered one of the greatest games in professional football was almost overshadowed by the controversy over President Trump's executive order on immigration. And Judge Robart's temporary restraining order. An appeal by what must still be a reluctant Justice Department has already been slowed down by the 9th circuit in San Francisco. The Justice Department was denied an immediate reinstatement of the travel ban (which is really about vetting), and hearings have been set for this Tuesday.
The legal battle that will ensue is pretty hard to shoehorn into a sports metaphor. The 9th circuit is America's most liberal circuit court of appeals. The DOJ is going have to do the administration's tough work - uh, they are the administration actually, even if they don't really accept that yet - and this may end up in the Supreme Court. Which hopefully will have 9 members by the time the case theoretically reaches it's hallowed steps.
It's reasonable to be astonished - as the Washington Time's Charles Hurt was this past weekend - that the President's constitutional right to decide matters concerning the security of the nation, have been conflated with progressive battle cries on rainbow-like diversity. Even as America's safety and security is what guarantees those very rainbow rights. Unlike places like Yemen, Iran, Libya, Syria, Sudan, Iraq, or Somalia. But denouncing any perceived discrimination of any kind is valued higher than careful vetting of those who have been granted the privilege to pass through the nation's borders. At least by the screaming left. And by Judge Robart. And likely by most of the 9th circuit.
Good luck to the administration. They may need a Tom Brady miracle to fight their way successfully through this case.Posted by Keeley at February 7, 2017 3:36 PM