Return to Transcripts main page


Homeland Security Suspends Travel Ban; State Dept. Reverses Visa Cancellations; AG: "No One Is Above The Law, Not Even The President"; Redefining Manly Men a Business Success. Aired 12-1p ET

Aired February 4, 2017 - 12:00   ET


MIKE PENCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: -- round of applause for heaven's sakes (inaudible) Federalist Society's most distinction. Thank you for the warm introduction to my friend, Leonard Leo, everybody, is in the house. Ambassador Gray, members of the Federalist Society, honored guests, it's a privilege to be with you.

A privilege to be with you here in this place, in Congress hall at such a time as this in the life of our nation. I bring you greetings and I'm here today on behalf of the president of the United States of America, Donald Trump, who appreciates the Federalist Society and all (inaudible).

It's truly humbling to be in this position and to be in this place today. Thank you all of you members of Federalist Society for your support and your hard work over the past year. It was quite a campaign, but it's already been quite an administration. Am I right?

I know the president feels the same way as I do. We're here in no small part because of your commitment and the ideals of the Federalist Society to restore the promise of America.

It's fitting that we're in Philadelphia today in the shadow of Independence Hall, only steps away from where our founding fathers proclaimed ideals that have echoed throughout the ages.

They declared these truths to be self-evident, that we are all of us created equal and that we are endowed not by government, but we are endowed as the president himself recited this week in the National Prayer Breakfast, endowed by our creator with the inalienable rights of life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

That principle is at the center of the American experience and it will always be. Men who wrote these words will ever be honored in the American pantheon, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, James Madison and so many more.

Documents they drafted, the Declaration of Independence, the year in which they signed it, 1776, are now synonymous with the freedom of the world. What they did that day is the greatest gift we have as sons and daughters of the United States.

It's humbling to be so near to where they pledged to each other their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor, yet our founders were not finished with their noble work, were they? In the words of Abraham Lincoln, they had labored to create an apple of gold.

Now, they needed a pitcher of silver to frame it in, to adorn and to preserve the principles at the heart of our exceptional experiment and self-government. So it would be 11 years later in the summer of 1787, our founding fathers returned to Independence Hall.

They came to craft a framework of government that would protect those timeless ideals, the ideals that bind us together as a people and give us purpose as a nation. They gave us the Constitution of the United States of America.

It was and it is and I believe it will forever be the greatest charter of liberty our world has seen. It's fostered our nation's unparalleled success and it is to this day the greatest bull-work against tyranny in history.

This is the Constitution that President Trump and I have both sworn to uphold. On January 20th, just over two weeks ago, we stood before the American people and before God and we made solemn vows.

In my oath of office, I have simply promised to support and defend the Constitution as did the president and I promise you we will keep that oath.

People keep asking me what it was like up there on the stage. I tell people it was just very humbling. It was humbling for me to be there. My grandfather came to this country from a little town in Ireland when he was about our son's age.

Got on a boat, crossed the Atlantic and went through Ellis Island and took a train to Chicago, Illinois, where he drove a bus for 40 years. He was the proudest man I ever knew.

[12:05:02]The fact that Richard Michael Colley had the courage to cross that ocean is why Michael Richard Pence is now the vice president of the United States of America.

It is I expect startling to him knowing me as well as he did, in more ways than one, I found myself thinking upon that stage with that Irish man must be thinking looking down from glory and I've only come to one conclusion. He was right.

Not about me, he was right about America where anybody can be anybody because of the system of liberty that we have enshrined in the Constitution, the founding documents of this nation.

That moment was made all the more special because of the man who administered my Oath of Office, Justice Clarence Thomas. I'm privileged to have met Justice Thomas about a decade ago when I was a member of Congress and privileged to have a chance to get acquainted with a man of his conviction and his courage on the Supreme Court of the United States.

I know everyone in this room holds Justice Thomas in the same high regard. Not only that, we want to aid him in his lonely fight, his lonely fight too often on the Supreme Court and we can do that best by giving Justice Clarence Thomas another colleague on the bench, who shares his courage and his commitment to our nation's guiding documents and this we are doing.

You know, the American people elected President Trump I believe insignificant part because of his vow to do just that, to nominate someone to the Supreme Court in the mold of not only Justice Thomas but also of the late and great Justice Antonin Scalia.

It was such a special night earlier this week when we were joined not only by our nominee and his wife, but also by the widow of Justice Scalia and his son, who was with us there and shared that moment.

Justice Antonin Scalia's devotion to the Constitution will be forever remembered by the people of the United States of America. But this was President Trump's promise and make no mistake about it, my friends in the Federalist Society, we're in the promise keeping business in Washington, D.C. now.

Before I say anymore, it behooves us to remember Justice Scalia's legacy and honor his memory. We all knew the late justice, some of you personally. Others through his titanic impact on our nation's laws.

The Federalist Society actually owes him a great deal. Justice Scalia was one of its first faculty mentors in the early 1980s I'm told at the University of Chicago. Our country owes a great deal to him, too. His incomparable opinion, his dissents will stand the test of time, influencing future generations of lawyers through his wit and wisdom.

As his successor said the other night, America misses Justice Scalia greatly and I know we'll always cherish him in our hearts. Would you mind getting to your feet and just showing how much we appreciate the life and work and memory of the late Justice Antonin Scalia?

I mentioned before that last week, I had the great privilege to speak with justice's widow, Maureen, and the president had a asked me to invite her to join us at the White House for the Supreme Court announcement the next day.

But during the conversation, I told her that President Trump was about to nominate a worthy replacement for her husband and before I could go any further, she stopped me and said, actually, that's not how the president puts it.

[12:10:11]She said, the president actually told me that no one can replace my husband, they can only succeed him. Isn't that wonderful? And it's true. We all know why. That's why President Trump devoted so much energy to picking the best possible nominee.

Last year, President Trump took the unprecedented step of releasing a list of 21 men and women he was considering for the Supreme Court. It was full transparency, literally every step of the way, unprecedented transparency in this process.

Each individual, the president named, shared several key qualifications, sterling academic credentials, a brilliant legal mind and unwavering commitment to the Constitution of the United States.

Four days ago, as you all know, President Trump nominated someone who fits this description to a "T", Judge Neil M. Gorsuch. My friends, I could say with the outmost confidence, Judge Gorsuch is a worthy successor to Justice Antonin Scalia.

By the grace of God and with what I know will be the tireless effort of everyone in this room, I believe Neil Gorsuch will soon take his seat as an associate justice on the Supreme Court of the United States.

Judge Gorsuch plain and simple is one of the most mainstream, respected and exceptionally qualified Supreme Court nominees in American history. But don't take my word for it. That was actually the conclusion of the American Bar Association in 2006.

After President George W. Bush nominated him to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, the ABA gave him a unanimous rating of well qualified, which is the highest possible recommendation and the United States Senate agreed.

Only two months after Neil Gorsuch's nomination to the Court of Appeals, the Senate confirmed him by a unanimous voice vote. And nearly a third of those senators on both sides of the aisle are still serving in the Senate today, a unanimous vote. As President Trump asked on Tuesday, can you believe that? Well, yes, you can.

When you look at Judge Gorsuch's record ever since, in his decade on the Tenth Circuit, he's established himself as a fair and impartial judge who's been faithful to the constitution. He's well-known by his peers as a keen legal thinker.

Just as important, a clear legal writer. It's evident to all as a man of high character and courage, indispensable qualities for a jurist. Over the past few days, it's been amazing to see the outpouring of support from those who know Judge Gorsuch and his work.

Ed Whalen from the Ethics and Public Policy Center and a former clerk to Justice Scalia, declared him, quote, "a dedicated originalist and texturalist," who, quote, "writes with clarity, force and verve."

"The Wall Street Journal" praised him as quote, "a distinguished choice who will adhere to the original meaning of the Constitution" and Leonard Leo, who, of course, is here, called him an exceptional jurist.

By the way, Leonard, let me say again, how much I and the president appreciate your tireless work on behalf of our country and the Constitution. We are grateful for all you have done.

Now I should also note that Judge Gorsuch is so well liked that even those who disagree with him sing his praises. President Obama's former ethics czar simply said Judge Gorsuch is quote, "a great guy."

And Neil (inaudible), the acting solicitor general under President Obama endorsed Judge Gorsuch in the strongest possible terms. He called him quote, "an extraordinary judge," closed quote, who will, quote, "help restore confidence in the rule of law."

That's what this is really all about. Isn't it? Our constitutional order requires the rule of law without exception. We are after all, a nation of laws. Judge Gorsuch firmly understands this.

He said on many occasions that judges apply the law as written without regard to their own politics or personal feelings. He put it well on Tuesday.

[12:15:09]And movingly, saying, quote, "In our legal order, it's for Congress and not the courts to write new laws." He added it's the role of judges to apply, not alter the work of the people's representatives and my favorite line sitting as I was on the front row was this one.

He said, quote, "A judge who likes every outcome he reaches is very likely a bad judge. Stretching for results he prefers, rather than those the law demands." I don't know about you, but that's my kind of Supreme Court justice.

Not just his words, his record on the bench clearly demonstrates his fidelity to the wisdom of the founders rather than the whims of his own day and age. He's written more than 200 published opinions in his decade on the Tenth Circuit.

And if you read them all, and some have, which the president's team, I promise you, did, an unmistakable picture emerges. He's an originalist and a texturalist who will pick up right where Justice Scalia left off.

Judge Gorsuch has such a long history of holding the separation of powers and the checks and balances between the three branches. He also defends the Constitution's unique system of federalism and he restricts the national government to the specific and enumerated powers enshrined in the Constitution while leaving to the states much more sizable control over their lives and destinies.

This carefully calibrated mechanism so wisely designed by our founding fathers are a strong foundation for the protection of the American people's fundamental liberties. By defending them, Judge Gorsuch has shown himself to be a true friend of our freedoms.

It should be abundantly clear that Judge Neil Gorsuch is indeed a worthy successor to Justice Antonin Scalia. He's cut from the same cloth. Our Constitution and country will be stronger with him on the Supreme Court.

But we're not there yet, which is why I'm here. First, of course, we must abide by the Constitution and secure the advice and consent of the Senate. The morning after his nomination, I had the privilege of escorting Judge Gorsuch to Capitol Hill for the first time.

I'm pleased to report in just a few short days, he's already met with 12 senators in both political parties and he's making himself available to meet with all 100 members of the Senate if they're willing to meet with him. Of course, several announced their opposition within minutes of his nomination and now, they're even threatening to use the filibuster procedure in the Senate to stop him. Make no mistake about it. This would be an unwise and unprecedented act.

Never before in the history of our country, has an associate justice nominee to the Supreme Court faced a successful filibuster and Judge Neil M. Gorsuch should not be the first.

Let me say. President Trump and I have full confidence that Judge Gorsuch will be confirmed, but rest assured, we will work with the Senate leadership to ensure that Judge Gorsuch gets an up or down vote on the Senate floor one way or the other.

This seat does not belong to any party or ideology or interest group. This seat on the Supreme Court belongs to the American people and the American people deserve a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.

My friends, this is a historic time for our country. We're on the verge literally of reaffirming the supremacy of the Constitution in our nation's Supreme Court. We're giving a new voice to the age old vision of our founding fathers.

We're rededicating ourselves and our country to the timeless principles that they proclaimed only a few steps away from where we're standing today. Under President Trump's leadership, we're returning power to the American people, the rightful rulers of the greatest nation the world has ever known.

We have much work to do, but I'm confident. The grace of God we will accomplish the test before us. Let me close by saying thank you. Thank you to all of you for your work as men and women of the law, participants in the Federalist Society.

[12:20:00]Your own fealty to the Constitution of the United States and the way you live that out in your lives and your careers. I must tell you that it's inspiring to be with you today and I truly do believe that for all our nation has accomplished over these last 241 years, I'm absolutely confident that as we keep faith, with the ideals that were first minted just a few steps away from here in our founding documents in that declaration and in that constitution, the best days for America are yet to come. Thank you very much and God bless you. God bless you.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN GUEST ANCHOR: That was Vice President Mike Pence speaking to the Federalist Society in Philadelphia. The theme of his speech, the candidacy of Neil Gorsuch for the Supreme Court. He said that he believes and so does President Trump, that Gorsuch will soon be on the Supreme Court.

He called him a worthy successor to deceased Justice Antonin Scalia, saying that he was a texturalist, an originalist that sticks to the original meaning of the Constitution. He also cited specifically the unanimous vote from lawmakers that got Gorsuch on to the Tenth Circuit Court. Let's bring in our panel to talk about the political implications of all this.

CNN White House reporter, Stephen Collinson, CNN contributor, Salena Zito, who is also a reporter for the "Washington Examiner" and also with us I believe is Larry Sabato, the director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia.

Stephen, let's actually talk to you first. Trump seems to be attacking a federal judge, actually let's move on from that. Let's go back to what Pence was talking about here. What did you make of his defense of Judge Neil Gorsuch?

STEPHEN COLLINSON, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Well, I think this was about two things. First of all, it was a moment of celebration for the conservative movement. The Federalist Society after all played a great role in selecting Judge Gorsuch in the first place.

He was one of 21 nominees that were suggested by the society and Heritage Foundation to Trump at a time when a lot of conservatives were very worried about his nomination. But on a more political sensuous this was about debunking a lot of the Democratic arguments against Judge Gorsuch.

I think there was a clear warning there from the vice president that if Democrats used the filibuster, the 60 votes in the Senate to try to block Judge Gorsuch's confirmation, the administration will push Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, to use what's called the nuclear option, which would be to pass a rule which would for the first time mean that Supreme Court justices once susceptible to the filibuster and that you could have a majority senators in which case he would be confirmed.

So I think that was a very significant moment, but you know, you mentioned the travel ban. This ruling on Friday night staying the ban on travel entries from seven predominantly Muslim nations. Mike Pence didn't mention that.

I think that's significant, but that is an issue that's really going to intensify Democratic opposition to Judge Gorsuch. We just had Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, put out a statement today and I'll read some of it for you.

He said "The president's attack Judge James Robart, a Bush appointee who passed with 99 votes shows the disdain for an independent judiciary that doesn't always bend to his wishes and a continued lack of respect for the Constitution, making it more important to the Supreme Court serve as an independent check on the administration.

So you can see how Democrats are seizing upon this travel ban issue to open a new front I think against Judge Gorsuch and that's going to really complicate the confirmation process that Mike Pence just laid out.

SANCHEZ: Larry, quickly, to you. Does it surprise you at all that Mike Pence didn't mention the big breaking news today about Department of Homeland Security not enforcing Donald Trump's executive order and the State Department reversing their decision on some 60,000 to 100,000 visas?

LARRY SABATO, DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR POLITICS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA: Boris, I don't think he wants to get into that. That's why he didn't mention it except very indirectly, notice, he stressed his family's own immigrant past as though that's going to convince people this administration is pro-refugee or pro-immigrant. Obviously, that won't happen.

He was there at the Federalist Society to preach to the choir. The Federalist Society is a very conservative Republicans, supporting Scalia like justices on the Supreme Court, and that's exactly what they have with Judge Gorsuch, who will be confirmed.

It's almost inevitable that he will be confirmed one way or the other and that's what Pence said. If we have to do it without the 60 vote rule, if we have to do it with 50 votes plus Vice President Pence, we'll do it that way.

SANCHEZ: All right, Salena, to you now. One of the selling points for a lot of Republicans that weren't necessarily that gung ho about Donald Trump that got them over to his column was the fact that he may have multiple Supreme Court appointments during his years in office.

[12:25:13]The question has to be would Democrats be wasting political capital if they went all out in trying to filibuster Gorsuch when as Larry mentioned, it's very likely that he's going to be confirmed.

SALENA ZITO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Right. And I mean, I think what the Democrats are -- into this area, and right now, they're just reacting -- their voters are protesting and their position in Congress in the House and Senate is to be a no about everything.

And the problem for that is eventually, you need a message you need a tangible benefit for someone to go towards you. So, if you make everything about no, it does not expand your universe, your vote. So I think sort of like you pick the hill you want to die on, right?

And this is probably not the hill you want to die on because as he said, Gorsuch is going to be confirmed come hell or high water. There are other places where you can take the president on and have a more effective message.

I would suggest to them, I can remember when John Boehner said, they were all confused. The Republicans are sort of a mess and he came up with this where are the jobs and it worked. They need something like that. They need a strong, clear message to bring new people back to the party and also to not just be about no.

SANCHEZ: Would be interesting to see how the Democrats maneuver moving forward. Salena Zito, Stephen Collinson, Larry Sabato, thank you so much.

Ahead, we'll return to that breaking news of day. The Department of Homeland Security saying that it's not going to implement President Trump's order that bans citizens from seven Muslim majority countries from entering the U.S. The latest on that after a quick break. Stay with us.


[12:30:24] BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: The Department of Homeland Security saying that's it's not going to implement President Trump's order that ban citizens from seven Muslim majority countries from entering the United States.

The statement reading in part "DHS has suspended any and all actions implementing the affected sections of the Executive Order." It goes on to say, "This includes actions to suspend passenger system rules that flag travelers for operational action subject to the Executive Order."

A Statement Department official also tells CNN that it's reversing the cancellation of thousands of provisionally revoked visas.

Our team of reporters is covering the developing story from every angle. I want to start with CNN Washington Correspondent, Ryan Nobles. Ryan, the White House vowing to defend the President's order. Trump doing what Trump does, lashing out on Twitter this morning, right?

RYAN NOBLES, CNN WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: Yeah Boris. But, what we're seeing here is the Trump administration essentially, the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security, these are agencies that are under the purview of the President are following this restraining order that was put in place last night by the judge in Washington State. Effectively going back to where we were before the Trump executive order was issued.

But, that doesn't mean that Donald Trump and his White House by any means has given up this fight. This is what Donald Trump Twitted this morning as mentioned Boris, "Did not hold back in his criticism of the judge who made this order.

The opinion of this so-called judge as he writes, which essentially takes law enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned". And the White House put out a statement last night as well Boris, where they emphasized the fact that they view this is just of a legal fight that they will take out very end.

Sean Spicer, the Press Secretary for President Trump saying last night, "At the earliest possible time the Department of Justice intends to file an emergency stay of this order and defend the executive order of the President, which we believe is lawful and appropriate. The President's order is intended to protect the homeland and he has the constitutional authority and responsibility to protect the American people."

But, it is interesting, Boris, that the President of the United States would call into question the legitimacy of a sitting federal court judge. This judge is someone, James Robart, who was appointed back in 2003 by President George W. Bush, a Republican. He was confirmed by the Senate by a vote 99 to nothing. So, he is certainly legitimate. There's no doubt about that. But, even though Trump may be doing a bit of saber-rattling here and, you know, criticizing this judge, there's no constitutional crisis at this point. His administration is following what this judge has to say and they are ready to take the next stage of this battle to the courtroom, two different legal battles being fought here.

Boris, there could be immediate ones revolving the emergency stays and restraining orders, then there's the border battle about the overall constitutionality of this executive order. That could take some time to play out and it could be the Supreme Court that ultimately decides.

SANCHEZ: Yeah, that's right. Ryan Nobles thank you so much for staying on top of that for us.

Let's turn now to CNN Aviation and Government Regulation Correspondent, Rene Marsh. Rene, customs and board patrol held a late night call yesterday with the airlines. Essentially, telling them go back to things the way things were. You actually spoke to an airline executive that was part of that call. What did you learn?

RENE MARSH, CNN AVIATION AND GOVERNMENT REGULATION CORRESPONDENT: Well, I can tell you this, compared last night to this morning. We're certainly getting more clarity from the federal government on what this temporary lift of that travel ban means, not only for passengers, but for the airlines.

So, as you mentioned, CNN obtained this internal memo sent from IATA to its members. And IATA is a trade organization for major airlines worldwide. The organization general council sharing with the airlines the guidance that hasn't received from customs and border protection.

Now, the memos says that CVP informed all airlines "That all travelers who were eligible to travel to the United States, prior to its issuance meaning that Executive Order will now will be permitted to travel to the United States in keeping with the law as it existed pre- Executive Order".

Now, Boris, the memo goes on to say that CVP told airlines. "It is business as usual in terms of entry into the United States". "It is as if this Executive Order never existed."

[12:35:53] SANCHEZ: Fascinating. Rene Marsh, thank you so much. We're going to continue focusing on this ahead when we return.


SANCHEZ: We're expecting that the Justice Department will file an emergency stay against the judge's order to temporarily stop President Trump's travel ban. If and when that's filed, it could go to the Supreme Court, of course, only time will tell if that will happen when they reverse this reversal.

CNN Correspondent Sara Sidner joins us now from Los Angeles. Sara, first let's go back to this judge in Washington State. How did this decision wind up being made in his courtroom? SARA SIDNER, CNN CORRESPODENT: It is because of a lawsuit that was brought by the Washington State attorney general. Bob Ferguson brought the suit. He made it very, very wide reaching and this is important to decision because this judge's decision has made it a blanket statement and ruling that affects the entire nation, not just one or two states.

And so, that is why you're seeing a large reaction from the airports, from the Department of Justice. They have two reverse everything that Donald Trump ordered when it came to the travel restrictions and travel ban on Syrian refugees. Here is what the attorney general said to Anderson Cooper last night.


BOB FERGUSON, WASHINGTONS STATE ATTORNER GENERAL: It's not intuitive, how can one judge in any federal district court take an action like that. This is not unprecedented. We saw that when President Obama was president, where Republican ages sued the Obama administration of write of context. And we saw Federal District Court judges issue rulings that essentially shut down action by President Obama.

[12:40:08] So, there's nothing unusual about it from that respect. Our arguments in a nutshell were in two different buckets, Anderson. We have a group of constitutional claim, in other words. That the executive order violates basic constitutional principles, like due process, equal protection, the first amend establishment clause. You cannot favor one religion over another.

So, we had a group of claims here. We also had a group of claims at out statutory in nature. So, in other words saying that, the President's action violated specific federal statutes, like the Nationality, Immigration Act or the Administrative Procedures Act.

The bottom line is the judges do not pick and choose which one he felt were most persuasive. We may see that in his written order coming out in the next couple of day, Anderson. But the judge did conclude that we were likely to prevail on the merits of his action.


SARA SIDNER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Now, we're going to tell you a little bit about Judge James Robart, who is based in Seattle. He has been confirmed unanimously back in 2004 by the Senate. He was an appointee by George W. Bush back then before he became a federal judge. Basically he worked in private practice. And during the time he was praised during those confirmation hearings for being very community oriented, being involved in the community back when he was a private attorney.

He did a lot of pro bono work. And some of the pro bono work, the free work that he did for people, they were for actually for refugees who needed legal help. He's also been in the news. Imagine and being a judge for 12 year, every now and then you're going to make a decision or say something potentially controversial. And one of the things he said year during a lot of the lawsuit. And one of the lawsuits from the Obama Administration against the Seattle Police Department was that, "Black Lives Matter". And he said that after rattling off a whole bunch of numbers showing the disproportionate killing of black men.

I'm sure that's going to come up by, especially by the right. They will take a hold of that. You have also heard from President Trump in his tweet. But the truth of the matter is, he can tweet about it. He can yell about it. He can criticize this judge. He can call him a so-called judge. But this is a federal judge who was unanimously put in his position. And the State Department and President Trump have to respond and follow his ruling because that is the law. Boris

BORIS SNCHEZ, CCN ANCHOR: All right, Sara Sidner in San Francisco. Thank you, Sara.

Coming up, the White House vowing to fight a judge's order that put a halt to Trump's travel ban, this growing legal battle, next


[12:45:42] SANCHEZ: The White House vowing that it will challenge a federal judge in Seattle, who temporarily blocked President Trump's travel ban. The ruling coming from Washington State, the attorney general there says, "That no one is above the law. Not even the President."

Let's discuss that, with CNN Political commentator Jeffrey Lord. He's also the author of the book "What America Needs" the case for Trump. Jeffrey the Department of Justice is planning to appeal this judges ruling. So, what happens if that appeal is denied?

JEFFREY LORD, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, of course this is just the way American government works? So, all I can tell you is it will probably work its way all the way through. As I'm sure the Trump Administration will take there, right and (inaudible) through.

SANCHEZ: Certainly. Now, Jeffrey, multiple federal judges to different extremes have sided against Trump's executive order. There have been some that have sided with specifically in the first SERT (ph) Massachusetts.

LORD: Right.

SANCHEZ: But how do you respond the legal critics of this travel ban that Trump has overstepped his legal or constitutional authority. What's your response to them?

LORD: Yeah. I just don't agree. I read the executive order. It's not a Muslim ban. It doesn't even mention the word Muslim. It's about 7 particular countries.

SANCHEZ: Well, it might not mention -- it might not mention the word Muslim, but through out the campaign. Donald Trump exclusively said that he would ban Muslims. LORD: Well, as, you know, he eventually changed that position to talk about countries. Where there was serious terrorist activity. So, that, there are seven here. I mean there are what? 40 somewhat countries who or have a predominant Muslim population. They're not even included in this.

SANCHEZ: Now, Jeffrey, I do want to get your response to the tweet that Donald Trump sent out this morning. I'm not sure if we have it. But he specifically says that Judge James Robart is a so-called judge. Here's the tweet. Actually, that's not it. But, you know, the one I'm talking about.

I mean this is a judge that was approved unanimously by the Senate. He was appointed be I the last Republican President. Do you feel that Trump may be risks -- ruing his reputation? That he's trying to uphold as a law and order president by questioning the legitimacy of these judges?

LORD: Boris, right minute, a judge by the name. A federal judge by the name of Neil Gorsuch is under attack in the Senate by Senator Schumer and others as being "Out of the mainstream." Attacking for politicians for presidents, United States senators to, you know, question a judge is a long, long, very long tradition.

Abraham Lincoln wasn't big on the chief justice of the United States because he'd supported trying to write slavery into the constitution. So, there's a long tradition of this.

SANCHEZ: Now, another question is. Could all of there have simply been avoided if the Trump Administration had written this order perhaps differently or consulted with more of the national agencies that are being affected by this? Do you wish they had had perhaps a different approach?

LORD: It's possible. I mean I mean, having been in government it always helps to be right there in the room when these decisions are made. And I frankly don't know. But, you know, if every administration. I mean this is not the Bay of Pigs for John F. Kennedy or Donald Trump. I mean this is something that they've got themselves out there. He believes strongly in this. The American people voted for him in part because of this, because he wants to protect country.

So, you know, they'll learn as they go along here. They've got a lot of experienced people, by the time. Jeff Sessions his Attorney General, I think the Justice Department will be there. So, maybe they've had a problem here. But I think they'll get every over it and get into gear quickly.

SANCHEZ: All right, Jeffrey Lord. Thanks so much for your perspective we're appreciate --

LORD: Thanks, Boris.

SANCHEZ: -- the time. [12:49:33] Ahead, the legal implications of President Trump's travel ban being reversed. Trump calls the move ridiculous. But what options does the White House have? We're going to talk about this next.



RYAN LANE, DREAM BEARD: Hi, my name is Ryan Lane. And this is "Dream Beard." Dread Bread is groom product line for men. We specialize in beards. So when we started Dread Bread back in 2012 is really out in necessity. There was no product out there that I could find for men to groom their beard to help coat the hair follicle, to help promote growth, to help with itch.

And so, through that we really kind of light bulb when off and we realize that there was a huge market for this that was on top.

One of the key to our success has been the hand written notes. We've done it in very package. We're constantly communicating with our customers. We have live chat on our website. We're very active on social media.

We just begin to kind of create this auro, like manly men, just having fun and not really taking themselves super serious. Beard we're associated with bad people. But I think what Dream Beard is doing is we're changing that perception.

You can be who you are, with the beard. The beard doesn't have to be, you know, in a certain stereo type. I believe that Dream Beard kind of sense of more of a massage. That hey, this isn't just a trend, it's not just something that looks cool, but this is who I am. You know I am bearded man.


SANCHEZ: Thanks for staying with us in Newsroom. We're expecting the Justice Department to file an appeal anytime now against the federal judge who blocked President Trump's travel ban. The case could go all the way to the Supreme Court.

So, let's bring in CNN Legal Analyst and former Federal Prosecutor, Laura Coates also joining us, Raul Reyes, Attorney and Immigration Analyst.

[12:55:02] Laura, first, to you, how do you expect a justice department, Department of Justice to fight this? What aspect of the decision do you think they're going to go after?

LAURA COATES, CNN LEGAL ANALYST AND FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, they're going to have in their hand, the order for Massachusetts judge who has a polar opposite finding of the Washington judge where they said look, not only is this maybe not Muslim ban, it doesn't actually say the word Muslim in the actual executive order. We can all turn our side eye and raise an eye brow to that one but the Massachusetts have said.

Also, there's not, there's no property right meaning, there's no due process violation here. If somebody is not entitled to either maintain or actually obtain a visa. They'll have that fight in our hand. So the biggest kind of gun that the DOJ will have here is this.

A lot of deference is given to the President of the United States. Deference derived from a congressional order that said that the President has this already decide who can come into the country and must leave the country based on national security. That is a huge, huge tool to have in their pocket.

SANCHEZ: Yeah, we are all part of the argument from Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson is that the executive order is unconstitutional, saying that it violates part of the first amendment. How strong is that that argument?

COATES: Well it is.


RAUL REYES, ATTORNEY: Right, right said the Washington state really does have a strong case going for it because there is a due process case to be made. Because some of those people who affected by the travel ban when they came to this country, irrespective of visas, they had the right at the airport to seek legal counsel, to make the case for asylum, to at least speak with some type of adviser and that was denied.

So there's a due process argument. They have an argument under the first amendment because this ban does seem to give preference to Christian refugees from this nation over Muslim people from these Muslim majority countries. There's also quite -- so that's also brings into play equal protection.

But for a judge to issue this type of order on a national scale, I mean, this is extraordinary, but there is a very clear legal standard here. Part of that includes the likelihood of success on the merits -- the federal judge in Washington has already agreed that the Trump administration has an uphill climb here, that they probably -- that they could indeed lose this case.

So going forward, the Trump administration is going to be on the defensive. And when you step back, where I think is very worrisome for the Trump White House is right now, 53 percent of Americans disagree. They oppose this so-called Muslim ban. And also 53 percent of Americans are against what Trump is, you know, are disapproving of what Trump has done since he came into office. So there's going to be a lot of outside pressure.

I know your last guest sort of giggled when you ask him about Trump's tweet about this federal judge, but that's not something to be taken lightly. This goes to speaks to the heart, you know, our separation of powers, respect with the judiciary, the constitution, all things that Vice President Pence brought up when speaking about Judge Neil Gorsuch and his nomination for court. And here's Trump on behalf of administration making light of those that actually and sort of brushing those aside as though those very serious constitutional concerns do not matter.

SANCHEZ: Yeah, it's not the first time that he's gone after a judge.

REYES: Right.

SANCHEZ: But, Laura something that Raul touched on that is really interesting. The travel ban has been disputed in courts across the country. But this Ninth Circuit Judge, James Robart has basically made his decision nationwide.

And that's based on as Raul said, some president going back to the Texas judge that ruled on President Obama's executive order. Do you think this is going to stand because of the President or is that something you foresee the administration going after?

COATES: Oh, the administration will absolutely go after Mr. Gorsuch. It hasn't quite gotten to the ninth circuit yet. We expect that it will get there soon. And remember ninth circuit is editorially (ph) liberal and has a very different viewpoint between the more conservative circuit.

In fact, justices have come from the Supreme Court. And so, this is going to be the perfect battle for a Supreme Court of United States to look at because you most assured we are going to have the ninth circuit ruling one way and the first circuit ruling in different way, which will suggest that listen, the Supreme Court hates to have confusion.

When there's confusion, it means we cannot had equal protection, equal application of the law. Therefore, this is the right time to do it. Interestingly enough Trump has nominated Judge Gorsuch to the bench who is notorious in his complete advocacy for separation of powers and doesn't take so kindly to the idea of having people trample on those rights.

And so, you're going to have kind of an irony playing out here, is that while trying to offend "So-called Judge in Washington sState, "the same criteria has been why Trump had lauded Judge Gorsuch.


SANCHEZ: Real quick, one word to answer to both of you, does Neil Gorsuch ultimately end up being on the Supreme Court by the time the decision is made this case?

REYES: By the time a decision is made, I would say no.


COATES: For the ultimate constitutionally, yes even you disagree.

[13:00:07] SANCHEZ: All right, thank you both for your perspective. I appreciate that. The next to our CNN Newsroom starts -- REYES: Thank you.