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.

 

Trump bid to reinstate travel ban fails following late night appeals court ruling

page: 11
106
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 09:36 PM
link   
a reply to: gortex

I can't get a court to see anything past 3 in the afternoooooooon...lol




posted on Feb, 6 2017 @ 10:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
*shrug* Appeal. The judge in question is a partisan hack with no grounding in the reality of the legality.


It is no longer in Robart's hands.

edit on 2/6/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 12:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: gortex

I knew this would not be easy for Trump, thankfully. It is very difficult to overturn a TRO. The burden of proof is high and must prove that removing it causes a clear and immediate danger.

Calling a judge a 'so called' judge did not help him. They did remove the word 'outragous' from the description of the order minutes later, but the damage had already been done. It is dangerous and authoritarian for the executive branch to describe the judicial branch in that way.




No, what's outrageous is that we can guess exactly how Federal Judges in the United States are going to rule based upon their political affiliation as if they were any other slimy politician.

Conservatives are not innocent of this. But Liberals are the ones who mainstreamed it.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 12:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: DJW001

a bit hyperbolic.

EO's are operational memorandums, not law. Since his job is to execute the law, he has some leeway in interpretation when determining how the execution will take place.


That leeway ends where it violates the constitution and existing laws.

And "hyperbolic" is this from the President



Donald J. Trump
Verified account
‏@realDonaldTrump

Just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril. If something happens blame him and court system. People pouring in. Bad!



Insane for a President to (again) personally attack a FEDERAL JUDGE..

BUT...He is actually blaming the COURT SYSTEM in it's entirety!

Judicial branch BAD!...THAT is the rhetoric of a 3rd World Dictator attacking other branch's of government that are meant to balance his power.

He is a ridiculous man..And Conservatives and Democrats and everyone in-between who has read the constitution are pointing out the same. Only his most fascist supporters are supporting this.



The old hag Ruth Ginsburg attacked Trump by wearing her dissent collar the day after Trump was elected, in addition to a blatant attack earlier in the year.

So you're going to call Ginsburg a corrupt 3rd world judge right? Because she did literally the exact same thing you are bitching Trump is doing right now.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 01:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5


BUT...He is actually blaming the COURT SYSTEM in it's entirety!

Judicial branch BAD!...THAT is the rhetoric of a 3rd World Dictator attacking other branch's of government that are meant to balance his power.

He is a ridiculous man..And Conservatives and Democrats and everyone in-between who has read the constitution are pointing out the same. Only his most fascist supporters are supporting this.


Yep. No other president would dare to belittle the court system.


The ruling is expected to come down within the next week. Obama argued it's an "easy case" that never should have gotten to the highest court in the first place.

"It's not something that should be done based on a twisted interpretation of four words in, as we were reminded repeatedly, a couple of thousand page piece of legislation," said Obama, predicting that "the Supreme Court's going to do what most legal scholars who have looked at this would expect them to do."

By making these comments, Judge Napolitano said that the president was trying to prepare the American people for a decision that he expects to lose.

"If he does lose that, the [ObamaCare] statute is eviscerated. But he's basically gonna say, 'Big deal. It's just nine people in black robes. Who cares?' When he says things like that, it undermines the fabric of American law," said Napolitano, adding that there is "antipathy" from some of the justices toward the president.


insider.foxnews.com...


Obama had taken the unusual step of scolding the high court in his State of the Union address Wednesday. "With all due deference to the separation of powers," he began, the court last week "reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests -- including foreign corporations -- to spend without limit in our elections."


www.foxnews.com...


President Obama took a shot at the Supreme Court today for even agreeing to hear King v. Burwell — the pending lawsuit challenging the legality of how his team has implemented Obamacare —​ in the first place. “This should be an easy case,” Obama said during a press conference in Germany. “Frankly, it probably shouldn’t even have been taken up.”



www.nationalreview.com...


President Obama elaborated on his claim that a Supreme Court ruling against Obamacare would be “unprecedented,” as he suggested today that the court does not take its responsibilities “seriously” if they do.

“We have not seen a court overturn a law that was passed by Congress, on a economic issue, like healthcare — like I think most people would clearly consider commerce — a law like that has not been overturned at least since Lochner [vs New York, 1905],” Obama told reporters during the question-and-answer session of the Associated Press luncheon.


www.unitedliberty.org...

So Obama attacked supreme court justices. That would mean Obama was "actually blaming the COURT SYSTEM in it's entirety!

Judicial branch BAD!...THAT is the rhetoric of a 3rd World Dictator attacking other branch's of government that are meant to balance his power. "

But strangely not only did you not mention the fact Obama did this and make it seem like Trump was the first President to make these sort of claims, but you also didn't scream that Obama was being a dictator when he did this.

I wonder why you feel it was ok for Obama to do this but think its the end of separation of powers for Trump to do it?



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 01:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

The left excuses what Obama does and applies a double standard when it suits them.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 02:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Grambler

The left excuses what Obama does and applies a double standard when it suits them.


Look I am not even trying to be one of those people that dismisses any criticism of Trump by saying "Obama did bad stuff"

But if the argument is going to be made that Trump is doing something that is unprecedented and is going to destroy the country, and there are several well known incidents of the Obama doing the same thing, then it bares mentioning.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 02:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

agreed



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 03:25 AM
link   
ITT: deflection

We're talking about the here and now. What the current president is doing. We're not talking about JFK, Nixon, or Lincoln. You had your 8 years of vocalising your dissent regarding Obama. Move on. We're discussing the current potus.
edit on 7-2-2017 by fencesitter85 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 09:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: chuck258

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: DJW001

a bit hyperbolic.

EO's are operational memorandums, not law. Since his job is to execute the law, he has some leeway in interpretation when determining how the execution will take place.


That leeway ends where it violates the constitution and existing laws.

And "hyperbolic" is this from the President



Donald J. Trump
Verified account
‏@realDonaldTrump

Just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril. If something happens blame him and court system. People pouring in. Bad!



Insane for a President to (again) personally attack a FEDERAL JUDGE..

BUT...He is actually blaming the COURT SYSTEM in it's entirety!

Judicial branch BAD!...THAT is the rhetoric of a 3rd World Dictator attacking other branch's of government that are meant to balance his power.

He is a ridiculous man..And Conservatives and Democrats and everyone in-between who has read the constitution are pointing out the same. Only his most fascist supporters are supporting this.



The old hag Ruth Ginsburg attacked Trump by wearing her dissent collar the day after Trump was elected, in addition to a blatant attack earlier in the year.

So you're going to call Ginsburg a corrupt 3rd world judge right? Because she did literally the exact same thing you are bitching Trump is doing right now.


Justice Ginsberg didn't attack a President? She attacked a private citizen who was saying disgusting things...and even then, she was professional enough to walk back her words and apologize.

Trump is a despot..and incompetent one.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

She is still compromised... Using your logic the lefts argument that the EO is a defacto Muslim ban because of what, as you put it private citizen Trump, said about Muslims during the election is null and void.

He was not President at the time he said those things.
edit on 7-2-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 05:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

SCOTUS Justices recuse themselves...She would have to decide to recuse herself..

What did she say about Donald again?



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

If you dont know what she said then how come you said she attacked him?

Either you know or you are just making stuff up because you hate Trump.

Which is it?



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 06:46 PM
link   
Here are the oral arguments made to the 9th circuit. ATS thread - www.abovetopsecret.com...




A ruling should come quickly according to the judges.
edit on 7-2-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-2-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-2-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 07:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I know what she said, but encourage people to educate themselves in the topics of which they speak..since my word is rarely taken at face value.



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 07:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Haven't had a chance to listen. What was your opinion?



posted on Feb, 7 2017 @ 07:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

What I thought was posted in the new thread.



posted on Feb, 8 2017 @ 11:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: gortex

I knew this would not be easy for Trump, thankfully. It is very difficult to overturn a TRO. The burden of proof is high and must prove that removing it causes a clear and immediate danger.

Calling a judge a 'so called' judge did not help him. They did remove the word 'outragous' from the description of the order minutes later, but the damage had already been done. It is dangerous and authoritarian for the executive branch to describe the judicial branch in that way.

But it's ok for a judge to make law because ... left wing democrats



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 06:12 AM
link   
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus




But it's ok for a judge to make law because ... left wing democrats

Judges don't make law they uphold it but the interpretation of a law can differ which is why we have appeals courts to scrutinise decisions made and change verdicts where necessary.
If Trump acts in an unconstitutional way isn't it the duty of the courts to stop that or does the noise from his dog whistle overrule the constitution because ....Terror !

Trump is wrong , even his nominee for the Supreme Court has called the president's attacks on the judiciary "demoralising" and "disheartening".





edit on 9-2-2017 by gortex because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 03:12 PM
link   
a reply to: gortex

You know the SC nominee was prolly told by trump to make it look like he is disagreeing with him right?



new topics

top topics



 
106
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join