It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Seattle judge blocks Trump immigration order

page: 6
13
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 08:51 AM
link   
a reply to: DrStevenBrule

Even the dictator is subject to the law.




posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 08:54 AM
link   
a reply to: plaindoughnut

Some people actually think he has supreme power or something. Kind of like trump himself does. Lol.

Now we see just how great our government really is.


Sorry trump but your not the king.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 08:55 AM
link   
a reply to: gortex

The EO have not references of new laws or make any new laws, the laws are already established, by congress, all the EO does is enforcing existing laws.

So no is no outside the scope of the Constitution.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 08:55 AM
link   
a reply to: MakeAmericaSaneAgain

Now we find out who passed history class and who cut that day.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 08:57 AM
link   
a reply to: DrStevenBrule

Their job is to interpret the law of the land actually.
Upholding the law goes to the police.
We are not a police state....yet anyway.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 09:01 AM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

The constitution.
That's the evidence brought forth.


This EO was not thought out and was drafted by amatures.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 09:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: schuyler
Meh? Seattle. Go figure. It will have to wind through the courts. Stand by....
really?Because it's gone into effect already. People are getting on planes and ships now as we speak.

This so called president does not have ultimate power.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 09:11 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 09:13 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

If there is no authority why do they need to go through the process of an appeal?


(post by Sillyolme removed for political trolling and baiting)

posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 09:18 AM
link   
a reply to: marg6043




The EO have not references of new laws or make any new laws, the laws are already established, by congress, all the EO does is enforcing existing laws.

The EO is seen to breach the Constitution , is that not the ultimate US law ?
It's discriminatory on the basis of religion.

The EO will likely be amended to remove that element and just name the countries as sponsors of terror or some suchlike.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Actually that's

Executive 1/3

Judicial 1/3

Legislative 1/3

Remember???

That judicial includes the supreme court AND the lower courts.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: marg6043

Marg you have that exactly right problem is its very apparent that a good part of posters have not taken time to read applicable law nor the EO.

Instead they post incorrect position as told by FSM, MSM and social media.

For them it's sad to see the generally anti-corporate left so easily played by a bought and paid for shill of a corporate judge make a ruling based on economic rather than national security issues.

Just another question of jurisdiction, if a "district" judge makes national stay, then why have circuit courts above them.

Most should see the problem here but blind hate for DJT is in play.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 09:39 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

The visas in question have already been issued.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 09:39 AM
link   
I'm seeing what the term triggered means. I finally get it and it's green!



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 10:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: marg6043




The EO have not references of new laws or make any new laws, the laws are already established, by congress, all the EO does is enforcing existing laws.

The EO is seen to breach the Constitution , is that not the ultimate US law ?
It's discriminatory on the basis of religion.

The EO will likely be amended to remove that element and just name the countries as sponsors of terror or some suchlike.


How does it discriminate on religion? I do not recall the EO saying NO ISLAM WORSHIPPERS. It just say People from said countries.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 10:52 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 11:29 AM
link   
President Trump has tweeted his opinion of the judgement.

The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!
twitter.com...


Shows he has contempt for the legal system as well as the security services unless they agree with him.



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: gortex

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, in creating the authority of the Congress, “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.” Thus from a Constitutional stand point it is the responsibility of Congress to establish all laws and rules of naturalization or immigration

This on the facts of those of none citizenship.

For those that are citizens, we have this one,

14th Amendment

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States,” are, “citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

If you have anything else that I am no familiar with in the constitution about immigration please let me know and post here.

Like I said before, congress is the one that makes the laws, Trump EO is base on those laws.


edit on 4-2-2017 by marg6043 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2017 @ 12:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Phoenix

I know and thanks for pointing that out, it will not stand, because is not constitutional articles that address what the judge is trying to do either.

What the judge is doing is base in an opinion of law and that law he better find it

Here is the constitution of the US for anybody that wants to read it.

US Constitution

blogs.law.widener.edu...




top topics



 
13
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join