For the second time, the Trump administration’s executive order stopping visas from (now) six countries and refugees for a set period of time has been blocked by a federal judge. This time, Judge Derrick Watson in Hawaii (an Obama appointee) decided that the executive order amounted to an overreach under… the establishment clause. Really. And not because of what was written into the EO, but because of what candidate Donald Trump said during the campaign.

Watson criticized what he called the “illogic” of the government’s arguments and cited “significant and unrebutted evidence of religious animus” behind the travel ban. He also noted that while courts should not examine the “veiled psyche” and “secret motives” of government decision-makers, “the remarkable facts at issue here require no such impermissible inquiry.”

“For instance, there is nothing ‘veiled’ about this press release: ‘Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,'” Watson wrote, referring to a statement Trump issued as a candidate.

This is an entirely new standard of judicial ruling, if we are going to start using as a basis for judgment a candidate’s statements instead of the words of the actual EO or law.

The Court has found that Trump's order violates the religious establishment clause and has blocked the #muslimban from going into effect.

— Neal Katyal (@neal_katyal) March 15, 2017

"The notion that one can demonstrate animus toward any group of people only by targeting all of them at once is fundamentally flawed" pic.twitter.com/x59FcjAOaC

— Rachel Maddow MSNBC (@maddow) March 15, 2017

"Significant and unrebutted evidence of religious animus driving the promulgation of the Executive Order" pic.twitter.com/kSz13zfJki

— Rachel Maddow MSNBC (@maddow) March 15, 2017

This is an entire can of worms that I’m sure will not be a happy judicial precedent.

https://twitter.com/sunnyright/status/842151478538211328

The people now claiming extralegal statements matter more than legal text demanded that we ignore everything Gruber said about Obamacare.

— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) March 15, 2017

We should challenge every gun control law passed before about 1970.

— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) March 15, 2017

To be fair, what the president says has always been more important than a law’s text, which is why the Obamacare “it’s a tax” argument—wait.

— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) March 15, 2017

Uh, yeah. This is a legitimate hot mess, and will probably be immediately appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which already ruled on the first executive order. And as can be imagined, President Trump was not happy with the ruling.

If the courts are going to continually pick and pick at this EO to find any way they can to block it, what will happen when the Trump administration throws down the gauntlet and just blocks all visas to anyone from any country from being issued for 90 days? That day may very well be coming. The left may well lose their minds, but the Trump base will love it. And at this point, what does the administration have to lose?