Federal Judge Just Issued a Stay Against Donald Trump's "Muslim Ban"

Judge Ann M. Donnelly's ruling halted deportations, but refugees abroad remain in limbo.

A federal judge in Brooklyn issued an emergency stay Saturday night against President Donald Trump's executive order banning immigration from certain predominantly Muslim countries, temporarily allowing people who have landed in the United States with a valid visa to remain.

The ruling—a stunning defeat for Trump at the end of his first week in office—protects from deportation refugees or visa holders who were detained at American airports since the signing of so-called "Muslim ban." It also protects those in transit when the emergency ruling was filed.

Federal Judge Just Issued a Stay Against Donald Trump's "Muslim Ban"


NOTE: Seekingalpha posted this news first here, initially with no attribution. I am re-posting, with the link he posted later, to get it into the Breaking News Forum because he is now offline.


One of the main difficulties with noobs in politics is that they just don't get how complicated everything really is - that there is a necessary spiderweb of connections between and beyond departments, that the network is real - and essential. That if you jump in blind, you make one helluva mess.

If the State Department had been left intact, at least for the transition, this mess would not have happened.

If a bit of time had been taken - a few "t's" crossed and "i's" dotted, we could have taken care of our own. Instead, too many were stranded and left hanging. Too many lives were disrupted unnecessarily. Wrongly.

Yes, bureaucracies suck. Yes, there's frustrating red tape. But it's all there to protect the people. Sucks that protections are complicated, but they are.

You wanna throw the baby out with the bathwater? ...There are consequences.

Too late now.. in the hearts and minds of the patriotic muricans, all muslims are banned in America. Officially.

originally posted by: Pandaram
Too late now.. in the hearts and minds of the patriotic muricans, all muslims are banned in America. Officially.

Disgusting.

a reply to: soficrow

These are the "taking names" portion of future policy setting in play.

Maybe a country on the list settles indifferences and establishes new relations between the 2 country's? Maybe a country jumps to conclusions before congress can process EO's and shows where to list their name? Take a look a the attached article... with the following quote within:

"The restrictions against travel by Muslims to America are an open affront against the Muslim world and the Iranian nation in particular and will be known as a great gift to extremists.”...Earlier on Saturday, Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani.

www.independent.co.uk... ntry-a7551276.html

As I said before... if EO's were so powerful, Guantanamo Bay would be closed already.

originally posted by: ttobban
a reply to: soficrow

These are the "taking names" portion of future policy setting in play.

Maybe a country on the list settles indifferences and establishes new relations between the 2 country's? Maybe a country jumps to conclusions before congress can process EO's and shows where to list their name? Take a look a the attached article... with the following quote within:

"The restrictions against travel by Muslims to America are an open affront against the Muslim world and the Iranian nation in particular and will be known as a great gift to extremists.”...Earlier on Saturday, Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani.

www.independent.co.uk... ntry-a7551276.html

As I said before... if EO's were so powerful, Guantanamo Bay would be closed already.

The so-called policy was ill-conceived and badly executed. Such behavior can only be seen as aggressive and hostile - promoting terrorism and and moving the world closer to war.

Your link is bad - here it is again.

The United Nations has condemned the ban and the International Organisation for Migration called on the new President’s administration to continue offering asylum to people fleeing war and persecution.

“The needs of refugees and migrants worldwide have never been greater and the US resettlement program is one of the most important in the world,” the two agencies said in a joint statement.

Good.

What we need is an enlightened society, where Muslims are allowed to be no less enlightened than anyone else. That is what America was meant to be, and is why we have constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion. I am sure we can all stand to be a little more enlightened, it wouldn't hurt us a bit.

Religious fanaticism is everyone's problem -- and it's not just Muslims who have fanatics and potential terrorists in their ranks.

Angry people with violent intentions should be banned. The problem is, we'd have to ban every single one of us, at least sometimes. So we'd better just take responsibility to police our own minds, as well as policing the police.

a reply to: soficrow

Its not ban on muslims. Muslims from any other but those 7 sinners are ok to travel as they want. But, folks coming from terrorism gripped countries, with all respect, should not be allowed entry without extreme vetting.

Part of this process can be legal way - and that is fine as such.

But do not label things with a racist agenda - when they are not.

a reply to: deckdel

Yes, we know. He is protecting his own business interests.

Trump’s Immigration Ban Excludes Countries With Business Ties

...[Trump's] proposed list doesn’t include Muslim-majority countries where his Trump Organization has done business or pursued potential deals. Properties include golf courses in the United Arab Emirates and two luxury towers operating in Turkey.

PS. I did not write Bloomberg's headline.

a reply to: soficrow


Well the conspiracy theorists will have aa field day claiming the Judge is a socialists of the illuminati or something were behind this. The simple issue was that the ban (as it stood) was badly drafted and unconstitutional!

The "Stay" only applies to the people caught in limbo while in transit Saturday.

The order says the government can't "deport" or send back.

And I'm not seeing any ban on Muslims in the EO in question.

Lots of MSM sensationalism happening.

I disagree... the temporary 'ban' worked..... sure the Judge decided to set aside the ban for this case...
but word of mouth in the community of Muslims in flight to USA sanctuary will alert everyone seeking entry that the old Obama Open-Borders Free-For-All is no longer operational

the Customs sections of ports-of-entry no longer have a red-carpet rolled out for shoe and underwear bomber wanna-be's

the evil minded Jihadist driven Muslims must now avail themselves of the Mexico underground & drug cartel corridors of secret entry to the America First land of open-eyed patriots



as to the question....-> was the Obama, Wide-Open-Borders scheme proper & correct & the Trump 'ban' wrong & ill advised...
my view is that the Obama decision to allow criminals, diseased, middle-eastern displaced persons, 98% Muslim followers vs. the 1% Christians/Bahais/Alawites/Kurds/et al was worser than the attempted, Trump 'ban' on all travelers', whatever religion, from the list of 7 war-torn states

It is just a temporary measure so that the ones that were in transit can stay. I see there are some people envited here by the military for helping our soldiers that are left in their country, the one guy sold his house, he and his wife quit their jobs and they were at the airport when the ban came into effect in their own country. I think that there needs to be some consideration for people like him even though he was waiting for his flight at his airport when this happened. This guy is definitely not a terrorist. I hope Trump allows him and his family to come in, there were some that helped our soldiers there that will get hassled for helping our men by some people who are not so nice in their area.

But I do not know if that was a real news event or something made up by the networks. It is hard to tell, I can't trust what I see on the news on TV anymore, there is so much acting being staged.

originally posted by: soficrow

Judge Ann M. Donnelly's ruling halted deportations, but refugees abroad remain in limbo.

A federal judge in Brooklyn issued an emergency stay Saturday night against President Donald Trump's executive order banning immigration from certain predominantly Muslim countries, temporarily allowing people who have landed in the United States with a valid visa to remain.

The ruling—a stunning defeat for Trump at the end of his first week in office—protects from deportation refugees or visa holders who were detained at American airports since the signing of so-called "Muslim ban." It also protects those in transit when the emergency ruling was filed.

Federal Judge Just Issued a Stay Against Donald Trump's "Muslim Ban"


NOTE: Seekingalpha posted this news first here, initially with no attribution. I am re-posting, with the link he posted later, to get it into the Breaking News Forum because he is now offline.


One of the main difficulties with noobs in politics is that they just don't get how complicated everything really is - that there is a necessary spiderweb of connections between and beyond departments, that the network is real - and essential. That if you jump in blind, you make one helluva mess.

If the State Department had been left intact, at least for the transition, this mess would not have happened.

If a bit of time had been taken - a few "t's" crossed and "i's" dotted, we could have taken care of our own. Instead, too many were stranded and left hanging. Too many lives were disrupted unnecessarily. Wrongly.

Yes, bureaucracies suck. Yes, there's frustrating red tape. But it's all there to protect the people. Sucks that protections are complicated, but they are.

You wanna throw the baby out with the bathwater? ...There are consequences.

ACTUALLY...thehill.com...

USE the ARTICLES TITLE on the PAGE its on. not the TWITTER TITLE.

a reply to: Tiger5

The simple issue was that the ban (as it stood) was badly drafted and unconstitutional!

[Worth repeating. AND - even Presidents can't take illegal actions.]

MORE....

More US federal judges halt enforcement of Donald Trump travel ban

In the last 24 hours, four federal courts have ruled on Trump’s immigration ban

...three other courts have issued their own rulings, putting a halt to deportations for those detained at airports across the country.

a reply to: soficrow

So a federal judge has jurisdiction over refugees and non-citizens now? Fascinating.

The U.S. Congress has control over all immigration-related regulations, while the White House is in charge of enforcing immigration laws.

I don't see "Federal Judge" listed there....

In fact, usually all they have is the power of review.

I also find it fascinating that liberals always scream "unconstitutional!!!" when it comes to non-citizens.. who by definition are not entitled to protection under the Constitution.

Let's see where this goes once it comes to the Supreme Court with a new conservative judge.

As for "stunning defeat", are you serious?

LOL

a reply to: GreyScale

Looks like laws were broken by the POTUS's proclamations, including Constitutional protections. Presidents do not have the power to break the law and act illegally. They are accountable.

And Federal Judges are responsible to uphold the law.

a reply to: soficrow

The ruling allows people already in the US access to a lawyer and prevents them from being placed on a plane and sent back to their country of origin. They do not stop the executive order nor does it call into question the legality nor constitutionality of the order. Immigration is the purview of the President.

The order also allows people from those 7 countries to have their case reviewed on a case by case basis so people from those countries can still enter the US.

It is not a ban and does not apply only to Muslims. The order is temporary (90 days) to allow new vetting procedures to be developed and implemented.

Key facts the media and insane liberal left are intentionally leaving out.

Where was all the outrage for the Cubans who were suddenly and unexpectedly banned by Obama A few weeks ago?

Disgusting hypocrites.

NUEVO LAREDO, Mexico — She spent weeks hiking through the Amazon, crossing a crocodile-filled river. She scaled border walls, escaped from immigration detention in Panama and slept in a church. Broke, hungry and exhausted, she found refuge with indigenous people in the jungle who took her in and fed her for a week.

Finally, six months after fleeing Cuba on a tortuous journey to the United States, Marleni Barbier, a dental assistant from Havana, made it to the border with Texas — about 12 hours too late.

More than 1,000 Cuban migrants who endured monthslong treks across as many as 10 countries to reach the United States are marooned in Mexico, halted by the Obama administration’s decision this month to end special immigration privileges for Cubans who make it to the American border.

www.nytimes.com...

originally posted by: deckdel
a reply to: soficrow

Its not ban on muslims. Muslims from any other but those 7 sinners are ok to travel as they want. But, folks coming from terrorism gripped countries, with all respect, should not be allowed entry without extreme vetting.

Part of this process can be legal way - and that is fine as such.

But do not label things with a racist agenda - when they are not.

Sickening how the MSM gave the EO such a name as "Muslim ban". Especially when the template for the order was drafted by the previous administration. Didnt hear it called that then...