Federal appeals court maintains suspension of Trump’s immigration order

a reply to: RazorV66

I agree with a need for reform in the path to citizenship.
I really question your numbers however.
Got something to back that up?
I've looked.I can't find any statistics to study.
At the local level if an arresting officer doesn't ask about citizenship a person could go through the entire process without ICE even being notified. That would skew any numbers.
The closest I could come was an unsupported claim by congressman Trey Gowdy that hundred of thousands of illegal aliens were fleeing jurisdiction or had criminal records in their country of origin .

originally posted by: queenofswords

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Grambler

"Folks, we can't do anything to keep ourselves safe from terrorists, because that will inspire the terrorists!"

Where was Mateen born?

But please point out where I said we can't do anything to keep ourselves safe from terrorists.

Do you not understand the multi-level aspect we are dealing with? Geeez! We see what you're doing.

Home-grown second generation immigrant radicals;

Ahh...I see the demagoguery is inflating to 2nd generation immigrations that are born and raised here...

Give it a week and we can ban 3rd generation extremist immigrants? Then we could ban TRUMP! Seeing as his grandfather immigrated here to dodge the german draft (like Donald dodged viet nam)..

a reply to: neo96

How and where did it fail? I'm not saying it hasn't I'm just asking for an example. Post 911 of course.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Why wouldn't their finding simply be that this particular EO was insufficient instead of it becoming , forgive the pun,
a federal case of all or nothing for his policy?

It can be reconsidered and rewritten to better represent the law and our values which are by nature inclusive.

originally posted by: FlyingFox

originally posted by: muse7

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: muse7

Foreign Nationals Do Not Have Constitutional Rights in the United States . CASE CLOSED .

Everyone has a right to due process even if they are in the country illegally.

Not enemy combatants.

But we don't call them prisoners.
They are detainees.

a reply to: FlyingFox

Scary and true.
I think we are smarter then that now and could see behind the curtain. At least I hope we are.
This motion and decision gives me hope of cooler heads.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

Sure he can do it. But as evidenced by what is going on right now, that doesn't mean his decree will go unchallenged.

The problem is this shoot from the hip edict issuing that is questionable.
Basics of the constitution are blatantly ignored. Why? He only had a handful of people, most yes men to confer with, giving the outcome a decidedly biased and ill conceived outcome.
It's the whole I can do this all by myself attitude he demonstrated during the campaign.
He would have had much better success if he had consulted a few more people maybe a constitutional lawyer for instance before he submitted it. Maybe a few of the so called swamp dwellers who know which paths lead to quick sand and poison sumac and which places can be traversed safely???

a reply to: Tempter

The whole outsider thing.

That's what we don't get.

This is America. We're all outsiders.

If you're operating from a position of fear the terrorists have already succeeded.

a reply to: Sillyolme

This is America. We're all outsiders

Nix the metaphors. We are not all outsiders. This is not time for a bunch of psycho-babble bs.

f you're operating from a position of fear the terrorists have already succeeded.

Oh, wow! Where did you get that one? That's like the FDR comment: All we have to fear, is fear itself.

Time for some new 2017 slogans. Fear is the wrong word for what people are thinking in today's society.

a reply to: Grambler

The constitution is like glass, solid and fluid and fragile and strong all at the same time.
For instance everybody is ok that the right to bear arms doesn't include missile launchers on the roof and tanks in the driveway. Things that were not in existence when the premise was first proposed by our forefathers. Taken in a static form it should allow them but being considered through the lens of the twenty first century of course does not. It didn't take rewriting the constitution to manage that. Just legislating from the bench.


As an example.

Overall I happen to agree with you.

a reply to: queenofswords

No. Fear is exactly the right word, hysteria is a close second.

Interesting the Judiciary is now the Executive

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: queenofswords

No. Fear is exactly the right word, hysteria is a close second.

I disagree. But, what are you afraid of. What is your fear?

a reply to: queenofswords

The whole idea of terrorist activity is by its very nature to incite terror or fear so yeah. If your hackles rise when you see a Muslim then yes you're operating from a position of fear.
If you want to put it on a bumber sticker or lapel button that's on you.
Maybe we should.

a reply to: khnum

No ,...evidence of their equality.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: queenofswords

The whole idea of terrorist activity is by its very nature to incite terror or fear so yeah. If your hackles rise when you see a Muslim then yes you're operating from a position of fear.
If you want to put it on a bumber sticker or lapel button that's on you.
Maybe we should.

Fear is very debilitating.

I refuse to live in fear. Especially, because of a person's ethnicity and/or appearance.

Ted Bundy certainly couldn't be judged on his appearance.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: queenofswords

The whole idea of terrorist activity is by its very nature to incite terror or fear so yeah. If your hackles rise when you see a Muslim then yes you're operating from a position of fear.
If you want to put it on a bumber sticker or lapel button that's on you.
Maybe we should.

Fear is very debilitating.

I refuse to live in fear. Especially, because of a person's ethnicity and/or appearance.

Ted Bundy certainly couldn't be judged on his appearance.

Define fear then.

Are any attempts to minimize or prepare for a threat considered fear?

I see many on the left seemingly afraid of what Trump may do, are you saying they are all wrong too?

originally posted by: queenofswords
I disagree. But, what are you afraid of. What is your fear?

I don't have any fear.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: queenofswords

The whole idea of terrorist activity is by its very nature to incite terror or fear so yeah. If your hackles rise when you see a Muslim then yes you're operating from a position of fear.
If you want to put it on a bumber sticker or lapel button that's on you.
Maybe we should.

Fear is very debilitating.

I refuse to live in fear. Especially, because of a person's ethnicity and/or appearance.

Ted Bundy certainly couldn't be judged on his appearance.

Define fear then.

Are any attempts to minimize or prepare for a threat considered fear?

I see many on the left seemingly afraid of what Trump may do, are you saying they are all wrong too?

Many on the Right are afraid of Trump.

Reporting a guy on an airplane because he's speaking Arabic. Remember that one?

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: queenofswords
I disagree. But, what are you afraid of. What is your fear?

I don't have any fear.

Nor do I. The trouble with the far left liberal mind is that it is unable to see or comprehend meaning that goes beyond the literal.

If I say, "I'm afraid that our intelligence-gathering mission in Yemen may have revealed some near future terrorist plot", that doesn't mean I am AFRAID (in fear or shivering in my boots).

When someone says, "I'm afraid for my daughter to go jogging near that neighborhood", that doesn't mean they are living in fear. It means they are living with common sense.