Breaking: 9th Circuit Issues Ruling Not To Protect America's Sovereignty

[beagle9]

Trump has surrounded himself with incompetent, arrogant, assholes.

They are all right wing hardliners. This is exactly what you can expect from such an administration. EOs are issued without considering the law and the constitution, basic human rights are ignored, and instilling fear is their primary weapon to gain support. Expect more of the same.

. If Americans were not laying dead in the streets of this nation, and at the hands of people yelling Allah Akbar, then your words might have meaning, but Americans are fed up.

 

[Rambunctious]

you don't know shyte. the court ruled and thats it

The courts ruled based on politics...we aren't stupid. President Trump will get his way in the end.

 

[conserveguy877]

The good part about this is the 7 nations are put on notice coming into the US. The ones coming in can wait to get in or get back in. I mean actually wait through proper vetting.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

Why is this court reviewing, and then ruling on something that is legal, and right to do under the Constitution ?? It appears that the left once again is trying to rule this nation by proxy, and in this case it used the 9th circuit to cause troubles for Americans. Might be getting near to Trump calling for Marshall Law in this country, because it appears that there are those here who are giving aid and comfort to the enemies of this nation, and that is unexceptable to most Americans on what is going on now.

"Might be getting near to Trump calling for Marshall Law in this country, because it appears that there are those here who are giving aid and comfort to the enemies of this nation"

What you said, I just pointed this out myself before in this thread and I cited the exact part of the US Constitution where President Trump can put America under Martial Law.

Article 1, Section 9 of the US Constitution states, "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."

Also Article 3, Section 3 of the US Constitution states:

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

You never answered how the president is granted authority to suspend habeas corpus unilaterally from Article 1 of the Constitution which grants powers to the Congress and not the executive.

Martial law on the national level may be declared by Congress or the president.

Under Article I, Section 8, Clause 15, of the Constitution, Congress has the power "to provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel Invasions."

Under Article II, Section 2, Clause 1, of the Constitution it declares that "the President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States."

Neither constitutional provision includes a direct reference to martial law. However, the Supreme Court has interpreted both to allow the declaration of martial law by the president or Congress.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Its still a decision that Trump will have to live with

Until the SCOTUS overrules it in the next few days. I would think, given the national security implications, this would be expedited on the docket.

Days?

It will be weeks at least. More likely months.

 

[brummelben]

you don't know shyte. the court ruled and thats it

The courts ruled based on politics...we aren't stupid. President Trump will get his way in the end.

HOW?

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Folks, you need to realize who the enemy is.
It's the American left.

 

[kaz]

9th Circuit rules against reinstating travel ban - CNNPolitics.com

I know. I know. Fake news website, but still...

OMG, really? The most liberal, most overturned court in the country ruled for the left? Stunning, simply stunning ...

Your orange messiah is probably stamping his feet right now while tweeting like a 13 year-old girl.

Why? Do you think he won't control the SCOTUS?

Ignorant of history? Do you have any understanding of the Warren Court, who he was, what party he belonged to and which President appointed him?

See: G52) Judiciary: Earl Warren Flashcards | Quizlet

Does that actually make sense to you Trump loving clown? Republicans suck. You can take your Warren loving Eisenhower appointee and shove it up your fascist ... er ... brass ...

 

[brummelben]

Its still a decision that Trump will have to live with

Until the SCOTUS overrules it in the next few days. I would think, given the national security implications, this would be expedited on the docket.

Days?

It will be weeks at least. More likely months.

The SC is tied 4-4, what kind of ruling will come from them

 

[Hutch Starskey]

9th Circuit rules against reinstating travel ban - CNNPolitics.com

I know. I know. Fake news website, but still...

I just don't understand why the government just doesn't modify the order to ensure it passes constitutional muster instead of complaining about bias etc. Just fix the problem and reissue for goodness sakes! It ain't that hard to do.

It really is that simple. Apparently it's better to rant on Twitter.

 

[beagle9]

His EO didn't effect American citizens rights. That's the point.

The point is,Trump lost

Till the next terrorist attack. Then Trump gets off Scott free. And the blame, and responsibility falls right into the liberals, and democrats laps; sealing thier fate.

This was not a political decision, the court ruled on the law

Wrong. The 9th circuit rarely rules based on law.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using USMessageBoard.com mobile app[/QUOTE]
They ruled. They decided. Time to deal with your loss.

. So it was political so you or your poltical vengence would be better concealed.

 

[brummelben]

Folks, you need to realize who the enemy is.
It's the American left.

What are you going to do other than whine?

 

[brummelben]

The point is,Trump lost

Till the next terrorist attack. Then Trump gets off Scott free. And the blame, and responsibility falls right into the liberals, and democrats laps; sealing thier fate.

This was not a political decision, the court ruled on the law

Wrong. The 9th circuit rarely rules based on law.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

They ruled. They decided. Time to deal with your loss.

. So it was political to you or your poltical vengence would be better concealed.

It doesn't matter, the ruling has been made

 

[Rambunctious]

HOW?

The supreme court or if that fails he can rephrase the order and pass it through the house. Any senator or congressman that votes against these measures will be putting Americans at risk. He will get his way. The President usually does one way or another.

 

[Dschrute3]

Trump will win this in the end. But the Democrats get to gloat over succeeding in delaying it. They aren't thinking about their country. They're only thinking about their Party. Trump's Order is completely reasonable. I feel he will be vindicated at some point.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Why is this court reviewing, and then ruling on something that is legal, and right to do under the Constitution ?? It appears that the left once again is trying to rule this nation by proxy, and in this case it used the 9th circuit to cause troubles for Americans. Might be getting near to Trump calling for Marshall Law in this country, because it appears that there are those here who are giving aid and comfort to the enemies of this nation, and that is unexceptable to most Americans on what is going on now.

"Might be getting near to Trump calling for Marshall Law in this country, because it appears that there are those here who are giving aid and comfort to the enemies of this nation"

What you said, I just pointed this out myself before in this thread and I cited the exact part of the US Constitution where President Trump can put America under Martial Law.

Article 1, Section 9 of the US Constitution states, "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."

Also Article 3, Section 3 of the US Constitution states:

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

You never answered how the president is granted authority to suspend habeas corpus unilaterally from Article 1 of the Constitution which grants powers to the Congress and not the executive.

Martial law on the national level may be declared by Congress or the president.

Under Article I, Section 8, Clause 15, of the Constitution, Congress has the power "to provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel Invasions."

Under Article II, Section 2, Clause 1, of the Constitution it declares that "the President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States."

Neither constitutional provision includes a direct reference to martial law. However, the Supreme Court has interpreted both to allow the declaration of martial law by the president or Congress.

So, in other words, the Constitution does not grant that power to the president whatsoever, and Chief Justice Taney was correct in Ex Parte Merryman that the president may not do so unilaterally.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Folks, you need to realize who the enemy is.
It's the American left.

What are you going to do other than whine?

I will wait to see if the Supreme's take it up, or if Trump writes a new order.

 

[Lakhota]

Thank you, Lady Justice!

HOW DO YOU LIKE THEM APPELLATES?

Ban Torched — Again...

3-0 Unanimous Ruling...

Supreme Court Showdown Almost Certain...

TRUMP ALL-CAPS FURY: ‘SEE YOU IN COURT’...

Read The Federal Appeals Court’s Ruling On Donald Trump’s Travel Ban

 

[Flopper]

Why is this court reviewing, and then ruling on something that is legal, and right to do under the Constitution ?? It appears that the left once again is trying to rule this nation by proxy, and in this case it used the 9th circuit to cause troubles for Americans. Might be getting near to Trump calling for Marshall Law in this country, because it appears that there are those here who are giving aid and comfort to the enemies of this nation, and that is unexceptable to most Americans on what is going on now.

Where in the Constitution does it give the president authority to ban anyone from entering the country? Not Article 2 where the president's powers are listed. Also, who's Marshall, and what on Earth is "unexceptable?"

The Constitution DOES NOT - STATES RETAINED THE RIGHT TO CONTROL IMMIGRATION


the 1798 federal immigration law was challenged by James Madison and Thomas Jefferson - the law was allowed to expire in 1800.

We had NO IMMIGRATION Law for 89 years - until congress decided that the Chinese insistence to work in the California Gold Mines constituted an EMERGENCY. A racist SCOTUS agreed.


..

OK but isn't this a unique situation where federal over rides the states due to national security issues ? I mean we are constantly under threat now, and when our very lives are at risk who is to make the judgement calls other than the President for whom the people had invested their power unto him in order to keep this nation as a whole safe ?

Constant threat? The court certainly didn't agree and the SCOTUS probably will not either. They were swayed by the simple fact that travelers from the seven countries included already face heavy scrutiny. There have been no fatal attacks on U.S. soil by people from the seven countries since 9/11. Had Trump selected countries like Saudi Arabia, Armenia, Lebanon, or Pakistan, he would have had a better chance.

 

[Rambunctious]

While everyone is talking about this so called ban, the Trump administration has been working behind the lights and cameras handing out pink slips to Obama appointees and re staffing our government.