More Misinformation from the Media:
“The gravity of this matter has clearly eluded Donald Trump, who has cast aside the Constitution and decades of jurisprudence by suggesting both ethnic and religious litmus tests for federal judges. These pronouncements illustrate that Mr. Trump holds the rule of law in contempt.
“Mr. Trump started down this road months ago, attacking a federal judge in California who is hearing a lawsuit against the now defunct Trump University. Last week, he asserted that the judge, Gonzalo Curiel, had an “inherent conflict of interest” because he was “of Mexican heritage.” Mr. Trump implied that Judge Curiel—an American born in Indiana—was biased against him because he intended to build a wall on the border to stop illegal immigration.” – Donald Trump’s Contempt for the Rule of Law, The New York Times, Editorial, 6/6/16
Fact Check: This Times editorial suggests that questioning the impartiality of Judge Curiel is purely an expression of ethnic prejudice against him. Certainly Trump could have expressed his objection with better wording. Nevertheless, Trump indeed can make a case for Curiel not being impartial.
The reason is not his ethnicity, but his membership in “La Raza Lawyers of San Diego.” La Raza means “The Race” in Spanish, and it is a term commonly embraced by activists for illegal immigration. An outstanding example is the National Council of La Raza (NCLR), an organization that works tirelessly to prevent any effective steps to curtail the flow of illegal aliens into the United States.
Although NCLR poses as a responsible mainstream organization, it has ties to Latino radicals and separatists. By working to undermine and neutralize our country’s immigration laws, NCLR is working to build the numbers and clout of Hispanics at the expense of other groups in the U.S. In bending the law to gain advantage in this fashion, NCLR clearly qualifies as a supremacist organization.
Curiel’s defenders maintain he shouldn’t be tied to NCLR because La Raza Lawyers of San Diego is a separate organization. That is technically true, but substantially false because these separate groups have ties with one another. For some proof, one need only go to the website of the La Raza Lawyers of California, of which the San Diego La Raza Lawyers Association is a member. That website lists the National Council of La Raza under the heading of “Links and Affiliates.” Given such affiliations, Donald Trump may indeed have legitimate concerns about Curiel, an Obama appointee, being fair to someone who advocates strict border control.
Once again, it would be wrong for Trump to question Curiel’s fairness purely on the basis of his ethnic heritage, but even if that were the case Trump’s prejudice certainly would fall short of an assault on the Constitution and contempt for the rule of law. Truly this is rhetorical overkill.
If the Times properly wants to castigate someone for doing those things it attributes to Trump it should look no farther than President Obama whose dictatorial decree of amnesty for illegal aliens is a blatant violation of the Constitution. But no one should count on that happening. The Times supports Obama’s arbitrary and lawless activity, calling it “sensible and humane.”