This is Bill Press and Friends on the District Productive Network.

Let's start on the Muslim ban.

It was a, I remember that this time, the second, the first ban, which is dead in the water,

thanks to the federal courts in Washington

State and the Ninth Circuit. So the White House with a lot of, you know, kind of hype put out a

second band, which they said was much cleaner, much neater, even though the first one they said

was still valid.

This second one is going to do the trick.

Well, it was no sooner out than a district, the attorney general, rather, in Hawaii, filed

suit against it, followed by the attorneys general of Oregon, Washington State, California, New York, and Massachusetts.

Might have been one of the state in there.

So the attorneys general of the state attorneys general were really on the job on this.

And the first ruling came out late yesterday in Hawaii, where the judge said, no way, this is an unconstitutional order.

And this is, in other words, because it is still, even though it's down to six countries, not seven,

even though they took out the language that said, we'll let Catholics in, but not Muslims.

The judge said, if you listen to Donald Trump, and if you read Donald Trump's words,

we know what this is all about. This is a religious test. This is clearly unconstitutional

against the First Amendment from the judge, Derek Watson, quote, the illogic of the government's

contentions that this is not a religious ban is palpable. The notion that one can demonstrate

animus toward any group of people only by targeting all of them at once is fundamentally flawed. He speaks

there to the argument that the Trump campaign, Trump administration makes, that this can't be a

Muslim ban because there are only six countries named, and there are a lot of other Muslim

...