His seeming complete lack of comprehension of the Separation of Powers and the tripartite system of government as laid out in the Constitution. He genuinely comes across as expecting the presidency to be totalitarian policy blank cheque. He's wrong.
Others felt the same way about Obama and see Trump as reinstating constitutional government and rule of law.
And of course the DOJ appealed, they work for Trump. We'll see what the outcome is. You seem very confident it will be "thrown out". I'm not sure where you have come to the view that the Constitution doesn't offer any protections to non-citizens. As far as I am aware, the Bill of Rights (AKA the first 10 amendments to the Constitution) protect everyone, including illegal immigrants. There is also a case that the 14th amendment also covers everyone. This is the amendment that guarantees due process, which just happened to for, the basis of the State of Washington vs Donald J Trump case.
I think it's much more likely that parts of the order will be deemed not legal, and other parts will be cleared. Even then, Trump will no doubt claim a rousing victory against Liberal activist "so-called judges" (who happen to be appointed by Republican presidents and confirmed by the senate 99-0). I'm sure the appellate judges that will hear the DOJ appeal are just dying to do a Trump a favour after his pathetic rhetoric against the judicial branch.
Your boy's a dud Vice. You've been had.
My reasoning for thinking it will not fly is from
http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/on-...will-win-over-seattle-judges-nationwide-stay/
There are some rights that all have and some that they don't all have ...
- shooting of non-citizens because they are visiting - not allowed (unless of course the 'visiting' people are also armed invaders bent of subverting the country they are visiting but that is a different kettle of fish)
- right to vote - only applied to legal citizens (voting when you are not a legal citizen being a crime)
- freedom of association - they all get that (except maybe Milo) unless for illegal purposes (I suspect that gathering together as an old time Democrat KKK mob to lynch some uppity new style Democrat BLMers would not be covered)
- freedom of travel - people inside the country legally sure (except for some eg criminals who have to get permission from their parole guy to do so or convicted paedophiles who want to hang around school yards etc) - but every country in the world has the right to say who can cross its border
- due process - pretty much everybody - but due process of law also means that applying the laws means that some people who have broken the law to be there in the first place, who are receiving housing/medical/food etc on the taxpayer's dime, who don't pay taxes, who illegally vote in the elections of a country not their own etc etc are going to find due process and rule of law to be something that will reduce their current quality of life.