Federal appeals court maintains suspension of Trump’s immigration order

originally posted by: Soloprotocol

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
The guy is a idiot voted in by idiots.

I don't think the people who voted him in were idiots. I think they needed a change, and I don't think they chose the right path, but that's not my call. And while I'm busy thinking, I think you guys are gonna want to mend some fences before # starts to get real because you're gonna need each other.

Then why not Sanders...maybe he was too intelligent for the Trump voters to get their head around.?

Maybe they don't like socialism

a reply to: muse7

So unexpected..... Never saw it coming.

Shocked in a bigly way.

I'm out, going to SHOUT on twitter on how much I appreciate checks and balances.

Separation of power RULES

originally posted by: Willtell
If they really wanted to have a legitimate ban of dangerous countries, they would have on the top of the list Saudi Arabia, Pakistan two Wahhabi countries, which those countries are predominately and where most of the terrorist is from geographically, and the fact is that ALL terrorism is from Wahhabis—100 percent.

Particularly PAKISTAN. In another thread are terrorist arrest statistics. More terrorists were arrested who arrived from Pakistan, than the 7 countries combined.

“The Government does not merely argue that courts owe substantial deference to the immigration and national security policy determinations of the political branches — an uncontroversial principle that is well-grounded in our jurisprudence. Instead, the Government has taken the position that the President’s decisions about immigration policy, particularly when motivated by national security concerns, are unreviewable,even if those actions potentially contravene constitutional rights and protections ... There is no precedent to support this claimed unreviewability, which runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy.”

Funny how that doesn't apply to the second.

But it does apply to people from seven different countries that are apparently in bed with Google,Microsoft,etc.

That apparantly do business with terrorist states.

This whole thing is a sick joke.

When the next terrorist attack happens guess what people ?

That's on Trump critics hands.

Every single drop.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: RazorV66

If you are in the country illegally, pack your shi*, because you will be leaving.

What, no due process?

Just mass round-ups?

Your right!
What a terrible thing.
An un-American thing.

America would never do that!
Not even for security!

Oh wait a minute....

a reply to: RazorV66

How exactly do they plan on finding these illegals if they don't have any paperwork to track them? Do they plan on raiding all the landscaping and roofing companies in America? I don't get how that would work, unless Trump and his team have GPS super powers or something then it'll be near impossible to round them up much less find them.

a reply to: RazorV66

That is the problem, there are so many millions of them here, it would have to be a mass round-up.

You expect a government that can't get the IRS to function like a well-oiled machine to be in charge of mass round-ups?

Exactly what due process do you think they should be afforded? How much more taxpayer money do you want spent on this problem? It's against the LAW.

Any and all it takes to make sure we don't screw up.

Your comments and the comments of others are very disturbing.

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
Then why not Sanders...maybe he was too intelligent for the Trump voters to get their head around.?

Why not Bernie? If he was 'too intelligent' for anyone, it would be the average Democrat voter. They're the ones that rejected him in favor of Hillary, not Trump voters.

a reply to: Grambler

So if the activism is overturned by non political judges, that will be good, and I will not feel bad for the people that relied on the courts making law.

But didn't you just say this?

And I will not feel bad when conservatives courts make rulings that many on the left with riot about.

Now if a conservative court makes law, I would object to that too.

But...didn't you just say this?

And I will not feel bad when conservatives courts make rulings that many on the left with riot about.

Again, make up your mind.

a reply to: introvert

I actually lol'd reading that. All in one thread, no less. Ordinarily, muscles and ligaments tend to snap when they're stretched out and flexed so hard but I guess the brain is a better gymnast.

a reply to: vor78

Ummm... did you forget about the rigged primaries? The average Democrat voter didn't reject Sanders the DNC did. The DNC is not the average Democrat voter it is a conglomerate of rich politicians.

When he was campaigning making these promises there were debates on here and people were explaining they wouldn't work because of legalities people didn't listen. Now courts are sticking to the constitution and shooting him down. Why are people complaining they were warned and now they are acting surprised.

originally posted by: neo96


When the next terrorist attack happens guess what people ?

That's on Trump critics hands.

Every single drop.

No, it's not. Logical fallacy at its best.

a reply to: BlueAjah

And that's why I'm pretty sure that the Ninth Circus just screwed the entire court system. This is going to further reinforce the widespread view that liberal activism in the courts is a major problem in this country, but worse, if there is a terrorist attack that might have been prevented by this executive order, the negative effects on the public credibility of the judicial branch of government will likely be enormous.

originally posted by: vor78

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
Then why not Sanders...maybe he was too intelligent for the Trump voters to get their head around.?

Why not Bernie? If he was 'too intelligent' for anyone, it would be the average Democrat voter. They're the ones that rejected him in favor of Hillary, not Trump voters.

I know not much of the presidential voting system but i never knew Americas was dumbed down as much as it is...Thanks for the update.

originally posted by: carabao

originally posted by: neo96


When the next terrorist attack happens guess what people ?

That's on Trump critics hands.

Every single drop.

No, it's not. Logical fallacy at its best.

Hows that ?

For over 20 years there have been terrorists attacks in this country.

LOTS of them.

The First World Trade Center Attack and and the Second are the most famous ones.

originally posted by: LumenImagoDei
a reply to: vor78

Ummm... did you forget about the rigged primaries? The average Democrat voter didn't reject Sanders the DNC did. The DNC is not the average Democrat voter it is a conglomerate of rich politicians.

No, I don't disagree with that. The DNC certainly did its best to screw Bernie Sanders. Still, he received roughly 43% of the Dems' primary vote to 55% for Hillary. It is what it is.

Not surprised. The 9th circuit has long been known as the most liberal in the nation.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
state university staff and students ability to travel>national security???

wow

crazy

This is not a final disposition of the Appeal. In fact, the lower District Court never reached a decision on the merits. The states filed a suit and asked for a temporary restraining order under Rule 65. A TRO is a sort of injunction ordering some temporary action while the case is underway. It doesn't end the case. It still is an active case in the Washington District Court. What the feds did was to ask for the extraordinary relief of a stay, putting the TRO on hold pending a final decision on the suit. The Appeals Court said, "No", we're not going to stay the TRO, primarily bacause the court panel unanimously said that the feds were going to ultimately lose. A possible next step is for Trump to ask for a rehearing en banc which means the entire Court would decide. If he loses there, which my 35 years of handling federal cases tells me would be the overwhekmingly probable result He could then appeal the denial of the stay to the Supreme Court. Since there is an even ideological split at that court, a 4-4 decision acts to uphold the Court of Appeals.

In my opinion, the 9th Circuit Opinion and Order is well-written, well-researched, and follows overwhelming Supreme Court precedent. And Trump has noone but himself to blame. His campaign statements about a Muslim ban carried a lot of weight on the 1st Amendment issue. And his position, in court, that he was, by God, the President, and no court could tell him what to do, was impossible to legally support.

a reply to: Tarzan the apeman.

Obama did it 19 times