The Law Your Propaganda Sites Are Not Telling You About

[hadit]

There is no Muslim ban you rube.

"True".....the real fact that the ONLY people banned were Muslims is just a coincidence........LOL

Research what percent of Muslims were NOT impacted and get back to us. A "Muslim ban" bans Muslims. Something that does not impact the vast majority of a group is not a ban on that group.

But we all knew that. Please return to the predictable rant.

It's funny how you tards work so hard to paint all Muslims as future terrorists when a tiny minority commit terror, and now you are pretending to be all concerned-like the Muslim ban not be called a Muslim ban just because not all Muslims are affected by it.

Words mean things, and calling it a "Muslim ban" is meaningless. It is an emotion laden term designed to strike fear into the hearts of the gullible and hate filled.

Feel free to show where I "work so hard to paint all Muslims as future terrorists".

 

[TheOldSchool]

There is no Muslim ban you rube.

Well, not anymore now that it's been struck down

There never was a Muslim ban.

 

[hadit]

and now you are pretending to be all concerned-like the Muslim ban not be called a Muslim ban just because not all Muslims are affected by it.

.....and all this "concern" from the same folks who INSISTED that Obama use the term "radical Islam"...Go figure.

They go together. Words mean things, and precise words mean precise things. Obviously, it is not those who agree with you that are interested in focusing attention on those who are most likely to kill Americans while allowing those who are not more latitude.

You seem to wish to lump all Muslims together.

 

[bendog]

Those who are supporting Trump's Muslim ban have been citing 8 U.S. Code 1182(f). This is what their propaganda sites have told them to parrot.

What they have not been told is that there is another law which specifically states no one may be denied entry to the US based on their nationality or place of residence.

8 U.S. Code 1152. This is the law the courts have been citing, but you would not know that if you only listened to the Trump Chump propaganda sources.

Except as specifically provided in paragraph (2) and in sections1101(a)(27), 1151(b)(2)(A)(i), and 1153 of this title, no person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person’s race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.

The 9th Cir made two findings pertinent to the Trumpbots misconceptions of law. First, courts may and do review immigration law.

"the Supreme Court nor our court has ever held that courts lack the authority to review executive action in those arenas for compliance with the Constitution. To the contrary, the Supreme Court has repeatedly and explicitly rejected the notion that the political branches have unreviewable authority over immigration or are not subject to the Constitution when policymaking in that context. See Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 695 (2001) (emphasizing that the power of the political branches over immigration "is subject to important constitutional limitations"); .....

"federal courts routinely review the constitutionality of—and even invalidate—actions taken by the executive to promote national security, and have done so even in times of conflict. See, e.g., Boumediene, 553 U.S. 723 (striking down a federal statute purporting to deprive federal courts of jurisdiction over habeas petitions filed by non-citizens being held as "enemy combatants" after being captured in Afghanistan or elsewhere and accused of authorizing, planning, committing, or aiding the terrorist attacks perpetrated on September 11, 2001);

Second, regardless of any power given the executive by congress to administer immigration, if the actions taken violate a group of people's constitutional rights, the law fails. The circuit court sort of criticized the district court for not explicitly discussing the rights of those who were in the US or who had been but were then denied re-entry.


'First, section 3(c) denies re-entry to certain lawful permanent residents and non-immigrant visaholders without constitutionally sufficient notice and an opportunity to respond. Second, section 3(c) prohibits certain lawful permanent residents and non-immigrant visaholders from exercising their separate and independent constitutionally protected liberty interests in travelling abroad and thereafter re-entering the United States. Third, section 5 contravenes the procedures provided by federal statute for refugees seeking asylum and related relief in the United States. The district court held generally in the TRO that the States were likely to prevail on the merits of their due process claims, without discussing or offering analysis as to any specific alleged violation.

But then the kicker. The opinion went on to discuss how the Administration had attempted to walk back the EO so it wouldn't apply to those folks with due process rights. And it concluded by saying "we don't trust a word you say." LOL

"The White House counsel is not the President, and he is not known to be in the chain of command for any of the Executive Departments. Moreover, in light of the Government’s shifting interpretations of the Executive Order, we cannot say that the current interpretation by White House counsel, even if authoritative and binding, will persist past the immediate stage of these proceedings. On this record, therefore, we cannot conclude that the Government has shown that it is "absolutely clear that the allegedly wrongful behavior could not reasonably be expected to recur." Friends of the Earth, Inc., v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs., Inc., 528 U.S. 167, 189 (2000) (emphasis added).

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

There is no Muslim ban you rube.

"True".....the real fact that the ONLY people banned were Muslims is just a coincidence........LOL

No... it was travel ban on people from these countries. The other 85% of Muslims worldwide were not affected. Hardly a "Muslim ban".

 

[TooTall]

There is no Muslim ban you rube.

"True".....the real fact that the ONLY people banned were Muslims is just a coincidence........LOL

If the only people in the 7 countries listed are ALL Muslims you would be correct. They aren't. Of course there are 43 other majority Muslim countries that were not affected by the Trump travel ban.

 

[Camp]

Trump will get a ban of one sort or another when it is rewritten and reviewed by the normal experts and agencies. All this debate and controversy is about, in reality. is covering up the fact that inexperienced and incompetent staff wrote a sloppy and unenforceable document for trump to sign before submitting that document for review by those experts and agencies.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

There is no Muslim ban you rube.

"True".....the real fact that the ONLY people banned were Muslims is just a coincidence........LOL

Research what percent of Muslims were NOT impacted and get back to us. A "Muslim ban" bans Muslims. Something that does not impact the vast majority of a group is not a ban on that group.

But we all knew that. Please return to the predictable rant.

It's funny how you tards work so hard to paint all Muslims as future terrorists when a tiny minority commit terror, and now you are pretending to be all concerned-like the Muslim ban not be called a Muslim ban just because not all Muslims are affected by it.

Funny, you leftards freak out when one nutter shots up a school yet shit your britches when somebody points out that almost all terrorists are Muslims, then dream up some stupid "Muslim ban" garbage because 15% of the worlds Muslims get affected by a travel ban from countries that are known terrorist hotspots.

You people are truly mental.

 

[Siete]

Donniedipshit said during the campaign the ban was only a suggestion ...

guess he's still making horseshit suggestions .. EAT UP TRUMPBOTS !

 

[Camp]

There is no Muslim ban you rube.

"True".....the real fact that the ONLY people banned were Muslims is just a coincidence........LOL

Research what percent of Muslims were NOT impacted and get back to us. A "Muslim ban" bans Muslims. Something that does not impact the vast majority of a group is not a ban on that group.

But we all knew that. Please return to the predictable rant.

It's funny how you tards work so hard to paint all Muslims as future terrorists when a tiny minority commit terror, and now you are pretending to be all concerned-like the Muslim ban not be called a Muslim ban just because not all Muslims are affected by it.

Funny, you leftards freak out when one nutter shots up a school yet shit your britches when somebody points out that almost all terrorists are Muslims, then dream up some stupid "Muslim ban" garbage because 15% of the worlds Muslims get affected by a travel ban from countries that are known terrorist hotspots.

You people are truly mental.

Your analysis seems distorted. A ban in several countries that allows for exceptions and waivers for Christians but not for Muslims is a Muslim ban for those countries on the list. The distortion you are using is to misinterpret and bring a new narrative to the ban to be not valid because it did not include all the Muslims in the world. The ban affects Muslims in the countries named, hence it is a ban on Muslims.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Trump will get a ban of one sort or another when it is rewritten and reviewed by the normal experts and agencies. All this debate and controversy is about, in reality. is covering up the fact that inexperienced and incompetent staff wrote a sloppy and unenforceable document for trump to sign before submitting that document for review by those experts and agencies.

I think they going for more.....big cut to immigration period.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Libs conveniently forget 2 democrat Presidents have done same thing

Attorneys general for Washington and Minnesota challenged Trump's executive order which is how it ended up in court. I'll only guess nobody challenged those previous 2?

I'm guessing your propaganda here is just that which is why they werent challenged

 

[Siete]

Trump will get a ban of one sort or another when it is rewritten and reviewed by the normal experts and agencies. All this debate and controversy is about, in reality. is covering up the fact that inexperienced and incompetent staff wrote a sloppy and unenforceable document for trump to sign before submitting that document for review by those experts and agencies.

I think they going for more.....big cut to immigration period.

Trump's going for anything that makes simpletons drool and hump each other.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Frankenstupid admits MN somalis have fought for isis...

 

[jc456]

Those who are supporting Trump's Muslim ban have been citing 8 U.S. Code 1182(f). This is what their propaganda sites have told them to parrot.

What they have not been told is that there is another law which specifically states no one may be denied entry to the US based on their nationality or place of residence.

8 U.S. Code 1152. This is the law the courts have been citing, but you would not know that if you only listened to the Trump Chump propaganda sources.

Except as specifically provided in paragraph (2) and in sections1101(a)(27), 1151(b)(2)(A)(i), and 1153 of this title, no person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person’s race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.

wrong.

 

[miketx]

There is no Muslim ban you rube.

Well, not anymore now that it's been struck down

There never was one.

 

[jc456]

There is no Muslim ban you rube.

"True".....the real fact that the ONLY people banned were Muslims is just a coincidence........LOL

who else is there?

 

[jc456]

Libs conveniently forget 2 democrat Presidents have done same thing

So have the so called "cons".

and?

 

[jc456]

There is no Muslim ban you rube.

"True".....the real fact that the ONLY people banned were Muslims is just a coincidence........LOL

Research what percent of Muslims were NOT impacted and get back to us. A "Muslim ban" bans Muslims. Something that does not impact the vast majority of a group is not a ban on that group.

But we all knew that. Please return to the predictable rant.

It's funny how you tards work so hard to paint all Muslims as future terrorists when a tiny minority commit terror, and now you are pretending to be all concerned-like the Muslim ban not be called a Muslim ban just because not all Muslims are affected by it.

well first you need to understand what the "TEMPORARY PAUSE" meant. Do you know what the term Pause means? Does it mean no admittance, or does it mean you have to wait a few days, weeks, months? Please enlighten me on your meaning of 'Pause'