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.

 

9th Circuit Judge Wants Another Vote over Trump Travel Ban Decision

page: 4
18
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 08:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
Could be a red herring to stall a final outcome.

But it is a cool idea.



In the meantime, Trump will probably just write a new EO next week anyway.



I think that's what they are trying to avoid! They know they messed up, and that we all know it, and now are veing faced with him putting in place an order they can't touch.




posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 08:21 PM
link   
For those discussing the Courts and access to classified information.

* - Title 18 - CLASSIFIED INFORMATION PROCEDURES ACT - Cornell

* - Department of Justice - 2054. Synopsis Of Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) Synopsis of the Act

Here is a brief overview of what the act covers (Cornell link).


§ 1. Definitions
§ 2. Pretrial conference
§ 3. Protective orders
§ 4. Discovery of classified information by defendants
§ 5. Notice of defendant’s intention to disclose classified information
§ 6. Procedure for cases involving classified information
§ 7. Interlocutory appeal
§ 8. Introduction of classified information
§ 9. Security procedures
§ 9A. Coordination requirements relating to the prosecution of cases involving classified information
§ 10. Identification of information related to the national defense
§ 11. Amendments to the Act
§ 12. Attorney General guidelines
§ 13. Reports to Congress
§ 14. Functions of Attorney General may be exercised by Deputy Attorney General, the Associate Attorney General, or a designated Assistant Attorney General
§ 15. Effective date
§ 16. Short title


This act spells out how classified information can be used in criminal trials, including closed hearings during the times classified info is discussed in addition to allowing a federal judge provisional access to see the classified evidence. In some circumstances the Federal judge is the only person allowed to see the evidence and can decide from their how to apply it. Federal judges can request more information from the government regarding classified information however the info is still restricted.

The link above contains the procedures for classified info in criminal court proceeding at all levels of the process.
edit on 11-2-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-2-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 08:26 PM
link   
a reply to: loam

As I understand the case involving the states their argument revolves solely around green card holders, who do have constitutional due process rights when inside the US.

Rewriting the EO and specifically excluding Green card holders while increasing vetting procedures and secondary questioning when entering the US will help in that realm.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 08:29 PM
link   
a reply to: AMPTAH

You dont understand how career advancement works in the federal curt system do you? Secondly if your teory about career advancement and world wide attention is correct then you are proving the judges are making their decisions based on politics and not the law, undermining their position / trust even more.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

That doesn't exactly apply here, since the Executive Order challenge isn't a criminal prosecution. I would assume there is a similar position for Constitutional challenges... or is there?

Criminal proceedings at all levels are typically given much more leeway for discovery, since someone's liberty is at stake and the conviction standard is higher. There may not be as much leeway given to divulgence of classified information in this case. If not, it seems logical that statements of such information by an official government representative would be accepted as factual unless somehow disproven.

Not completely sure, though... never had this question come up before.

TheRedneck



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 10:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
you are proving the judges are making their decisions based on politics


My friend, all life is politics.

You discover the reality of this when you get your first job, and realize that all the education you got in your field didn't prepare you for the real world where you have to use your knowledge in "interacting" with others.

So, yes, the judges make decisions based on politics. But, it's not democrat vs republican politics, it's the politics applied to their professional work environment.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 11:48 PM
link   
a reply to: AMPTAH

Politics has no place in interpreting the law / constitution.



posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 11:49 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

The same standard is going to apply.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join