Constrained discretion vs. unconstrained discretion: that is the issue in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals today re the “ban” or whatever alternative term you like. Presidents have “wide authority,” the media tell us, and they are not lying about that. (However, few if any TV heads have emphasized that there is already extended vetting before foreigners are allowed into the U.S. from the countries in question. Newswatchers could easily get the impression that there was little if any filtering during the Obama administration.) But unconstrained presidential discretion is another matter. Giving any president, even Mr. Trump, unconstrained discretion over anything has big league downsides. The only possible upside would be that Trump’s blame-shifting, which is already unconstrained by common sense or facts or shame, would be even less believable. But the price is far too high. If Trump manages to fool courts as well as Congress that his whims are unreviewable and that any oversight is unpatriotic and dangerous–game over.