Federal Judge in Hawaii Has blocked Travel Ban Hours before it is to Take Effect

a reply to: introvert

The notion that one can demonstrate animus toward any group of people only by targeting all of them at once is fundamentally flawed. The Court declines to relegate its Establishment Clause analysis to a purely mathematical exercise.

Sounds like he relegated it to his feelings.

originally posted by: proteus33
a reply to: allsee4eye

MY QUESTION IS THIS WHY THE HECK IF SAUDI ARABIA IS SO RICH AND A BASTION OF THE RELIGION OF PEACE NOT TAKING IN THE FIRST ONE OF THESE REFUGEES ?

Holy caps.

Saudi Arabia has issued 100,000 residency permits to Syrian refugees.


Numbers vary, but going back to 2011, the number is higher no matter what source is consulted.

Saudi foreign ministry officials claim that the nation has received nearly 2.5 million Syrians since 2011.[10][11]However, the BBC reports that Saudi Arabia has let in 500,000 Syrian refugees since 2011,[12] while Arab News reported that Saudi Arabia was already home to 500,000 Syrians[13] Saudi Arabia claims to have granted 100,000 Syrians residency. An official from Saudi Arabia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that Saudi Arabia "made it a point not to deal with them as 'refugees'."[6]

Wiki

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
This judge was appointed by Obama, this is a purely political decision. This man should be held accountable if anyone from these countries comes in and commit crimes.

What crimes? There has been a grand total of 0 crimes by Muslim immigrants who are not citizens since 9/11 (that most think the U.S. did anyway). All the most heinous crimes are committed by American citizens. Maybe he should concentrate on like.. actual crime in the U.S., and not worry so much about fake crime.

originally posted by: xuenchen
This "decision" is 100% political.

And everybody knows it.

You guys have a problem understanding something as simple as the 1st amendment.

So I don't think we should be concerned about your appeal to the majority, a logical fallacy.

originally posted by: fleabit

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
This judge was appointed by Obama, this is a purely political decision. This man should be held accountable if anyone from these countries comes in and commit crimes.

What crimes? There has been a grand total of 0 crimes by Muslim immigrants who are not citizens since 9/11 (that most think the U.S. did anyway). All the most heinous crimes are committed by American citizens. Maybe he should concentrate on like.. actual crime in the U.S., and not worry so much about fake crime.

So this part of the EO is all lies?

Recent history shows that some of those who have entered the United States through our immigration system have proved to be threats to our national security. Since 2001, hundreds of persons born abroad have been convicted of terrorism-related crimes in the United States. They have included not just persons who came here legally on visas but also individuals who first entered the country as refugees. For example, in January 2013, two Iraqi nationals admitted to the United States as refugees in 2009 were sentenced to 40 years and to life in prison, respectively, for multiple terrorism-related offenses. And in October 2014, a native of Somalia who had been brought to the United States as a child refugee and later became a naturalized United States citizen was sentenced to 30 years in prison for attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction as part of a plot to detonate a bomb at a crowded Christmas-tree-lighting ceremony in Portland, Oregon. The Attorney General has reported to me that more than 300 persons who entered the United States as refugees are currently the subjects of counterterrorism investigations by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: introvert

The notion that one can demonstrate animus toward any group of people only by targeting all of them at once is fundamentally flawed. The Court declines to relegate its Establishment Clause analysis to a purely mathematical exercise.

Sounds like he relegated it to his feelings.

Sure. It may sound like that if you don't understand the concept behind the Establishment Clause.

What it means is that the principle that protects us from governments taking certain actions, protects everyone...from the whole collective down to the single individual. That is why the judge said what he did.

The Court declines to relegate its Establishment Clause analysis to a purely mathematical exercise.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: proteus33
a reply to: allsee4eye

MY QUESTION IS THIS WHY THE HECK IF SAUDI ARABIA IS SO RICH AND A BASTION OF THE RELIGION OF PEACE NOT TAKING IN THE FIRST ONE OF THESE REFUGEES ?

Real question is, if Trump was truly concerned about terrorism, why is SA not on the list?

I suspect politics plays a huge roll and Trump thinks he can get away with banning others from others in the Middle East.

Any Saudi Terrorists are already moving around with fake IDs and passports from other countries anyway.

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: fleabit

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
This judge was appointed by Obama, this is a purely political decision. This man should be held accountable if anyone from these countries comes in and commit crimes.

What crimes? There has been a grand total of 0 crimes by Muslim immigrants who are not citizens since 9/11 (that most think the U.S. did anyway). All the most heinous crimes are committed by American citizens. Maybe he should concentrate on like.. actual crime in the U.S., and not worry so much about fake crime.

So this part of the EO is all lies?

Recent history shows that some of those who have entered the United States through our immigration system have proved to be threats to our national security. Since 2001, hundreds of persons born abroad have been convicted of terrorism-related crimes in the United States. They have included not just persons who came here legally on visas but also individuals who first entered the country as refugees. For example, in January 2013, two Iraqi nationals admitted to the United States as refugees in 2009 were sentenced to 40 years and to life in prison, respectively, for multiple terrorism-related offenses. And in October 2014, a native of Somalia who had been brought to the United States as a child refugee and later became a naturalized United States citizen was sentenced to 30 years in prison for attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction as part of a plot to detonate a bomb at a crowded Christmas-tree-lighting ceremony in Portland, Oregon. The Attorney General has reported to me that more than 300 persons who entered the United States as refugees are currently the subjects of counterterrorism investigations by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Oddly, there is no source. But nothing happened. The one mentioned was someone brought here as a child, a citizen. Who is this 'ME', noted, as in 'said to ME'?

Saw Trumps response as he broke the news at the Rally.
I think he expected the block?

If the executive order had officially gone into law there could have been interpretation issues.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: xuenchen
This "decision" is 100% political.

And everybody knows it.

You guys have a problem understanding something as simple as the 1st amendment.

So I don't think we should be concerned about your appeal to the majority, a logical fallacy.

Well your "explanations" aren't answering anything.

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: fleabit

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
This judge was appointed by Obama, this is a purely political decision. This man should be held accountable if anyone from these countries comes in and commit crimes.

What crimes? There has been a grand total of 0 crimes by Muslim immigrants who are not citizens since 9/11 (that most think the U.S. did anyway). All the most heinous crimes are committed by American citizens. Maybe he should concentrate on like.. actual crime in the U.S., and not worry so much about fake crime.

So this part of the EO is all lies?

Recent history shows that some of those who have entered the United States through our immigration system have proved to be threats to our national security. Since 2001, hundreds of persons born abroad have been convicted of terrorism-related crimes in the United States. They have included not just persons who came here legally on visas but also individuals who first entered the country as refugees. For example, in January 2013, two Iraqi nationals admitted to the United States as refugees in 2009 were sentenced to 40 years and to life in prison, respectively, for multiple terrorism-related offenses. And in October 2014, a native of Somalia who had been brought to the United States as a child refugee and later became a naturalized United States citizen was sentenced to 30 years in prison for attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction as part of a plot to detonate a bomb at a crowded Christmas-tree-lighting ceremony in Portland, Oregon. The Attorney General has reported to me that more than 300 persons who entered the United States as refugees are currently the subjects of counterterrorism investigations by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Oddly, there is no source. But nothing happened. The one mentioned was someone brought here as a child, a citizen. Who is this 'ME', noted, as in 'said to ME'?

You expect the EO to have all the sources?
There's no way they are going to put that into the EO if it's not valid.
Obviously the 'Me' is the president, you know, Donald Trump? The guy who signed the EO?
Why did that part confuse you?

originally posted by: Cauliflower
Saw Trumps response as he broke the news at the Rally.
I think he expected the block?

If the executive order had officially gone into law there could have been interpretation issues.

You were watching a Trump rally? Why is he even having them? He is already the President.

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: fleabit

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
This judge was appointed by Obama, this is a purely political decision. This man should be held accountable if anyone from these countries comes in and commit crimes.

What crimes? There has been a grand total of 0 crimes by Muslim immigrants who are not citizens since 9/11 (that most think the U.S. did anyway). All the most heinous crimes are committed by American citizens. Maybe he should concentrate on like.. actual crime in the U.S., and not worry so much about fake crime.

So this part of the EO is all lies?

Recent history shows that some of those who have entered the United States through our immigration system have proved to be threats to our national security. Since 2001, hundreds of persons born abroad have been convicted of terrorism-related crimes in the United States. They have included not just persons who came here legally on visas but also individuals who first entered the country as refugees. For example, in January 2013, two Iraqi nationals admitted to the United States as refugees in 2009 were sentenced to 40 years and to life in prison, respectively, for multiple terrorism-related offenses. And in October 2014, a native of Somalia who had been brought to the United States as a child refugee and later became a naturalized United States citizen was sentenced to 30 years in prison for attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction as part of a plot to detonate a bomb at a crowded Christmas-tree-lighting ceremony in Portland, Oregon. The Attorney General has reported to me that more than 300 persons who entered the United States as refugees are currently the subjects of counterterrorism investigations by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Oddly, there is no source. But nothing happened. The one mentioned was someone brought here as a child, a citizen. Who is this 'ME', noted, as in 'said to ME'?

You expect the EO to have all the sources?
There's no way they are going to put that into the EO if it's not valid.

You gave no source in your post for these '300 people'.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: proteus33
a reply to: allsee4eye

MY QUESTION IS THIS WHY THE HECK IF SAUDI ARABIA IS SO RICH AND A BASTION OF THE RELIGION OF PEACE NOT TAKING IN THE FIRST ONE OF THESE REFUGEES ?

Real question is, if Trump was truly concerned about terrorism, why is SA not on the list?

I suspect politics plays a huge roll and Trump thinks he can get away with banning others from others in the Middle East.

Any Saudi Terrorists are already moving around with fake IDs and passports from other countries anyway.

Proof?

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: fleabit

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
This judge was appointed by Obama, this is a purely political decision. This man should be held accountable if anyone from these countries comes in and commit crimes.

What crimes? There has been a grand total of 0 crimes by Muslim immigrants who are not citizens since 9/11 (that most think the U.S. did anyway). All the most heinous crimes are committed by American citizens. Maybe he should concentrate on like.. actual crime in the U.S., and not worry so much about fake crime.

So this part of the EO is all lies?

Recent history shows that some of those who have entered the United States through our immigration system have proved to be threats to our national security. Since 2001, hundreds of persons born abroad have been convicted of terrorism-related crimes in the United States. They have included not just persons who came here legally on visas but also individuals who first entered the country as refugees. For example, in January 2013, two Iraqi nationals admitted to the United States as refugees in 2009 were sentenced to 40 years and to life in prison, respectively, for multiple terrorism-related offenses. And in October 2014, a native of Somalia who had been brought to the United States as a child refugee and later became a naturalized United States citizen was sentenced to 30 years in prison for attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction as part of a plot to detonate a bomb at a crowded Christmas-tree-lighting ceremony in Portland, Oregon. The Attorney General has reported to me that more than 300 persons who entered the United States as refugees are currently the subjects of counterterrorism investigations by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Oddly, there is no source. But nothing happened. The one mentioned was someone brought here as a child, a citizen. Who is this 'ME', noted, as in 'said to ME'?

You expect the EO to have all the sources?
There's no way they are going to put that into the EO if it's not valid.

You gave no source in your post for these '300 people'.

Here's your source, the Executive order itself.
www.whitehouse.gov...

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: introvert

The notion that one can demonstrate animus toward any group of people only by targeting all of them at once is fundamentally flawed. The Court declines to relegate its Establishment Clause analysis to a purely mathematical exercise.

Sounds like he relegated it to his feelings.

Sure. It may sound like that if you don't understand the concept behind the Establishment Clause.

What it means is that the principle that protects us from governments taking certain actions, protects everyone...from the whole collective down to the single individual. That is why the judge said what he did.

The Court declines to relegate its Establishment Clause analysis to a purely mathematical exercise.

I'm fairly certain it doesn't protect everyone. As a non-American myself, I could only wish for such protection. I'm not sure attributing motives to the judge is a good idea, given the inherent bias in such a claim.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: xuenchen
This "decision" is 100% political.

And everybody knows it.

You guys have a problem understanding something as simple as the 1st amendment.

So I don't think we should be concerned about your appeal to the majority, a logical fallacy.

Well your "explanations" aren't answering anything.

Again, not my problem that you guys have comprehension problems.

Stop spitting irrelevant nonsense and logical fallacies...and read up on the matter.

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: fleabit

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
This judge was appointed by Obama, this is a purely political decision. This man should be held accountable if anyone from these countries comes in and commit crimes.

What crimes? There has been a grand total of 0 crimes by Muslim immigrants who are not citizens since 9/11 (that most think the U.S. did anyway). All the most heinous crimes are committed by American citizens. Maybe he should concentrate on like.. actual crime in the U.S., and not worry so much about fake crime.

So this part of the EO is all lies?

Recent history shows that some of those who have entered the United States through our immigration system have proved to be threats to our national security. Since 2001, hundreds of persons born abroad have been convicted of terrorism-related crimes in the United States. They have included not just persons who came here legally on visas but also individuals who first entered the country as refugees. For example, in January 2013, two Iraqi nationals admitted to the United States as refugees in 2009 were sentenced to 40 years and to life in prison, respectively, for multiple terrorism-related offenses. And in October 2014, a native of Somalia who had been brought to the United States as a child refugee and later became a naturalized United States citizen was sentenced to 30 years in prison for attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction as part of a plot to detonate a bomb at a crowded Christmas-tree-lighting ceremony in Portland, Oregon. The Attorney General has reported to me that more than 300 persons who entered the United States as refugees are currently the subjects of counterterrorism investigations by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Oddly, there is no source. But nothing happened. The one mentioned was someone brought here as a child, a citizen. Who is this 'ME', noted, as in 'said to ME'?

You expect the EO to have all the sources?
There's no way they are going to put that into the EO if it's not valid.

You gave no source in your post for these '300 people'.

Here's your source, the Executive order itself.
www.whiteh... ouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/03/06/executive-order-protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states

Link doesn't work. But, that is not a source. That is made up stuff to support an EO.

originally posted by: yuppa
This judge needs to be blocked when his re certification comes up from practicing law. this one was properly written and reviwed. it was totally compliant.

Ok how about this. All immigration is shut down for 5 yrs. only green card holders and tourist allowwed. Its time to play dirty.

US District Judges don't have any "certifications" come up. They are appointed by a President with the consent of the Senate. And your plan would block Albert Einstein, Robert J. Oppenheimer (who designed the bomb that won WWII), Leo Szilard (who wrote the letter to FDR that started the Manhatten Project), half the guys at Microsoft, Google and Apple.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: introvert

The notion that one can demonstrate animus toward any group of people only by targeting all of them at once is fundamentally flawed. The Court declines to relegate its Establishment Clause analysis to a purely mathematical exercise.

Sounds like he relegated it to his feelings.

Sure. It may sound like that if you don't understand the concept behind the Establishment Clause.

What it means is that the principle that protects us from governments taking certain actions, protects everyone...from the whole collective down to the single individual. That is why the judge said what he did.

The Court declines to relegate its Establishment Clause analysis to a purely mathematical exercise.

I'm fairly certain it doesn't protect everyone. As a non-American myself, I could only wish for such protection. I'm not sure attributing motives to the judge is a good idea, given the inherent bias in such a claim.

Good, don't assign motives to the judge then. The judge interpreted the clause as to not have to mean all countries that are Muslim majority to be included to be in violation of the clause. That is what the judge said. People are attempting to assign all types of motives to him other than that.