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.

 

It's Muslim Ban Time! DoJ Will Petition SCOTUS This Week to Hear the Case.

page: 3
15
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 10:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: Krazysh0t

0 so far does not imply 0 in the future. They use sleeper cells. They are not stupid enough to attack already. They don't have the numbers to succeed.

It implies that the threat isn't credible. I think you've been watching too much 24.




posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 10:10 AM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

Well they would do what the lower courts have done, and use the recordings and documented words to show intent.

And ask the question that is prominent: Those states who are on the ban, whose citizens have not been engaged in any terrorist activities, while those who are not, whose citizens did engage in terrorist activities. And explain how people, who have been already vetted, who have a green card, and all of the proper paperwork, why are those people being denied and refused entry into the country. If they are holding a green card, means that they are in the process of immigrating to the USA,

The Idea is a good idea, that there can be no doubt. However, the way it is being carried out, the direct actions reek of discrimination, and deliberately targeting one group, in an unconstitutional way.



posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 10:10 AM
link   
Having watched the US supreme court time and time again, here is what all that can be stated:

There are several options that the US Supreme court can do: 1) They can great centori, and agree to hear the case. However to even for them to grant Centori and get the case on the docket, will require 4 of the Justices to agree to such.
Another option is that they could simply refuse to hear the case, and let the rulings stand. That pretty much states that the majority of the justices agree with the decision of the lower court, and their reasoning for the decision being pretty much iron clad and does not need to be retried.

The third option is that they decide that the lower court needs to retry the case, and that indicated that the justices in the lower court made a mistake and did not consider everything.

Now even if Trumps Supreme Court nomination manages to get confirmed, it does not guarantee that the court will agree to hear the case.



posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: sdcigarpig

Past intent does not imply present intent. The subject is the EO, not Trump's past words. The ruling is the EO, not Trump's past words. This is not about Trump's pa or Trump's grandpa or what they said when they were alive. This is about the EO.



posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: sdcigarpig

If the SCOTUS does not hear then Trump will appeal to federal courts in Texas. They rule in Trump's favor and there would be stalemate between the Texas court and the Hawaii court. Then SCOTUS will have to decide.



posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 10:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: DBCowboy
The nations involved with the ban do not have an adequate vetting process for potential terrorists.

How many terrorists have been refugees or immigrants again?



So you'd favor a proactive approach to fighting terrorism.




posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Well APPARENTLY the things we are doing now are working just fine, so save your biased leading question. I don't want to hear it.



posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

How many Japanese committed terror on American soil in WW2? Why didn't America allow Japanese immigrants in WW2?



posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 10:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
a reply to: Krazysh0t

How many Japanese committed terror on American soil in WW2? Why didn't America allow Japanese immigrants in WW2?

You realize that we look back on what we did to the Japanese during WW2 as a black mark that we don't want to repeat right?
edit on 3-4-2017 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 12:52 PM
link   
Well it's looking like yet another defeat for trump. Gorsuch will not be confirmed.
Only nuclear action will save him now. McConnell is not willing to set a precedence for that action because it could be used against them in future appointment decisions.
Looks like we will be moving to choice two soon.




posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 12:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

What is it with Republicans who aren't smart enough to realize that when you tie a religion to any action in this country, you are going to be shut down. Trump is an idiot for letting that same rhetoric slip on the campaign trail and it doomed his EO from the start. "It will probably be heard by mid-month"? Says WHO? SCOTUS doesn't hear tons of cases and even less so when they agree with a lower Court's ruling. There is absolutely zero guarantee they will hear the case. But, keep on wasting time in this administration so your side can accomplish less. It truly makes my day. Trump is as lame duck as this entire pointless thread. Not pointless bc it's your opinion but pointless bc it's based on assumptions and rhetoric with zero basis in facts or judicial procedure.



posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Golantrevize

The travel ban has nothing to do with what he's able to do while his opponents flail around thinking of ways to block every move. The real question is what could have been accomplished by now if they would have been grown ups about this travel ban the first time. But in typical fashion, you pin the hold up on the president.



posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 01:06 PM
link   
a reply to: LSU0408

I believe that the correct things have been accomplished. Trump's destructive agenda is being held in check by the Checks and Balances set up within the Constitution designed for that very reason.



posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Gotta love Federal question jurisdiction, am I right? God bless the United States of America.



posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 01:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Golantrevize

It was a temporary ban and the time frame has nearly expired.
It's not going anywhere.
The Scutus isn't trumps toy. They defend the constitution.


How did the travel ban defy the Constitution?



posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: allsee4eye

You do know that the judges that overturned this did so because of words spoken by trump and Giuliani don't you?
They are weighing everything from the written EO and his actions. Not just the written order.
They know as we all do that trump want to ban Muslims. He has an issue with the religion.
Clear as day.


Yeah I don't know why... They're only responsible for hundreds of attacks across the world, and thousands of deaths... Why would he want to protect America from the Middle Eastern countries that have little to no vetting? Gosh. Mean old bastard is trying to put America's lives before the lives potential terrorists.



posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 01:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: DBCowboy
The nations involved with the ban do not have an adequate vetting process for potential terrorists.

How many terrorists have been refugees or immigrants again?



So you'd favor a proactive approach to fighting terrorism.



Maybe he's waiting to be attacked first.



posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 01:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Well it's looking like yet another defeat for trump. Gorsuch will not be confirmed.
Only nuclear action will save him now. McConnell is not willing to set a precedence for that action because it could be used against them in future appointment decisions.
Looks like we will be moving to choice two soon.



If so, Harry Reid should pat himself on the back. Frickin loser, lmao.



posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 01:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: LSU0408

I believe that the correct things have been accomplished. Trump's destructive agenda is being held in check by the Checks and Balances set up within the Constitution designed for that very reason.


Of course you believe that. The problem here is that there's nothing unconstitutional about Trump's EO.



posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 01:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: LSU0408

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: LSU0408

I believe that the correct things have been accomplished. Trump's destructive agenda is being held in check by the Checks and Balances set up within the Constitution designed for that very reason.


Of course you believe that. The problem here is that there's nothing unconstitutional about Trump's EO.

The courts disagree at the moment. They say that Trump's words and his surrogates' words on the campaign trail and even after the election all paint the EO as unconstitutional. Their argument is that context matters.

You can argue with me all day about this, but that is the current state of the EO. You don't have to like it; it's just reality.




top topics



 
15
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join