Travel Ban 2.0 DejaVu?

[TNHarley]

IKR? I hate he is trampling on the 1.7B muslims in those 6 countries constitutional rights.

It's about OUR gov targeting a specific religion. Which it can not do .

Please elaborate

The first amendment . The whole establishment clause if you want to get specific . The gov can't favor one religion over another .

How is this order doing that? Please, be specific again.

It targets these 6 majority Muslim countries. The reasons for doing so are dubious and really just pretext for the Dons true motives .

If its banning muslims, why is it only doing it in those six countries? They are all over the world.
Why isn't he kicking them out here?
Does it only ban muslims from those countries?

 

[Avatar4321]

Trumps ban targets muslims . He's said so on many occasions . His own words are screwing him over .

His reasoning is not strong enough to get the court to bypass the 1st amendment.

IKR? I hate he is trampling on the 1.7B muslims in those 6 countries constitutional rights.

It's about OUR gov targeting a specific religion. Which it can not do .

How does our government target a specific religion by prohibiting people of all religions and none from certain nations?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Hawaii and Maryland have put a STOP on Travel Ban 2.0 before it could take effect today. I say BRAVO!!!!

Maybe it is a political maneuver, "judicial overreach," as our President says, but if so, I'm glad there are still people in this country willing to go out on a limb and fight outrageous ideas such as the Executive Order, whether it is exactly within the scope of their job or not.

Last night Trump referred to 2.0 as a "watered down version" of his original E.O., which was lambasted by the courts on numerous fronts. Now he's making noise about going back to the original order--yeah, that should work well! It will be a sweet day when the Supreme Court tells him to quit shitting on the principles of this country and "BTW NO, you can't do this, so stop trying."

So you are happy to see judges ignore the law and issued purely political decisions.

 

[Avatar4321]

quit shitting on the principles of this country
A principle of our country is to accept refugees from war torn countries invaded by our enemies even though we cant vet them and have NO IDEA Who they are?
LOL

we cant vet them and have NO IDEA Who they are?
I've tole ya and TOLE ya, We do vet them for two f-ing years and we know as well as anyone can who they are. No system is perfect; I'm all for improvements, too. It is the ban that won't solve anything. Do a deep dive into how to slow/stop terrorist recruitment in this country and stiffen up procedures on Visas, such as looking at their social media (ala San Bernardino). Also look at how to keep would-be terrorists from having their investigations by the FBI ended (two of our most recent terrorist attacks were investigated by the FBI and closed without enough evidence).

Actually, a two year wait doesn't not a vet make. You don't think a terrorist would be willing to just hang out and chill for two years while he waits for a free pass into the united states?

They aren't just waiting. They are being vetted. If we didn't know who they were or where they were from, they wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell of coming into this country. Can a terrorist "fake it?" Sure, a good one with no previous history. If all of our terrorist attacks in this country had been by refugees or recent immigrants from the M.E., especially from the countries listed in the EO, I would probably feel differently. But we are barking up the wrong tree. It is not going to accomplish anything, except to make some people who hate foreigners happy.

Attorney Jonathan Turley is one of the few teevee pundits I take seriously - I sense little to no partisan distortion in him - and he thinks that the Hawaii ruling was thin and would probably be overturned if this goes to the Supreme Court. He says that the court put too much conjecture in the ruling and not enough case law.

Dunno. We'll see. I'd think Trump & Co would take this all the way to the SC.
.

Thin doesn't begin to describe it. There are three prongs the court addresses for establishment clause cases. The judge declined to address two of them because he said it failed the first one.

What's the first prong? The law must have a primary secular purpose. Can anyone honestly say national security isn't a secular purpose?

 

[protectionist]

Are you another legal expert who knows nothing, only what right wing talk radio tells you

That's a whole more than left wing TV.

 

[protectionist]

Hawaii and Maryland have put a STOP on Travel Ban 2.0 before it could take effect today. I say BRAVO!!!!

Maybe it is a political maneuver, "judicial overreach," as our President says, but if so, I'm glad there are still people in this country willing to go out on a limb and fight outrageous ideas such as the Executive Order, whether it is exactly within the scope of their job or not.

Last night Trump referred to 2.0 as a "watered down version" of his original E.O., which was lambasted by the courts on numerous fronts. Now he's making noise about going back to the original order--yeah, that should work well! It will be a sweet day when the Supreme Court tells him to quit shitting on the principles of this country and "BTW NO, you can't do this, so stop trying."

While they were attacking me, 2 jihadists asked me if I knew your home address and what car you were driving. I told them to go suck an egg, (while I pointed my .380 pistol at them) You're welcome. Hope you're as lucky next time.

 

[Avatar4321]

Trumps ban targets muslims . He's said so on many occasions . His own words are screwing him over .

His reasoning is not strong enough to get the court to bypass the 1st amendment.

IKR? I hate he is trampling on the 1.7B muslims in those 6 countries constitutional rights.

It's about OUR gov targeting a specific religion. Which it can not do .

Please elaborate

The first amendment . The whole establishment clause if you want to get specific . The gov can't favor one religion over another .

How does an order that doesn't mention religion prefer one over an other?

 

[Cellblock2429]

Hawaii and Maryland have put a STOP on Travel Ban 2.0 before it could take effect today. I say BRAVO!!!!

Maybe it is a political maneuver, "judicial overreach," as our President says, but if so, I'm glad there are still people in this country willing to go out on a limb and fight outrageous ideas such as the Executive Order, whether it is exactly within the scope of their job or not.

Last night Trump referred to 2.0 as a "watered down version" of his original E.O., which was lambasted by the courts on numerous fronts. Now he's making noise about going back to the original order--yeah, that should work well! It will be a sweet day when the Supreme Court tells him to quit shitting on the principles of this country and "BTW NO, you can't do this, so stop trying."

/---- Pres Trump should direct all immigrants from those countries be sent to Hawaii with the excuse, "They will support your tourism."

 

[OldLady]

Hawaii and Maryland have put a STOP on Travel Ban 2.0 before it could take effect today. I say BRAVO!!!!

Maybe it is a political maneuver, "judicial overreach," as our President says, but if so, I'm glad there are still people in this country willing to go out on a limb and fight outrageous ideas such as the Executive Order, whether it is exactly within the scope of their job or not.

Last night Trump referred to 2.0 as a "watered down version" of his original E.O., which was lambasted by the courts on numerous fronts. Now he's making noise about going back to the original order--yeah, that should work well! It will be a sweet day when the Supreme Court tells him to quit shitting on the principles of this country and "BTW NO, you can't do this, so stop trying."

Travel ban under Obama good, travel ban under Trump bad..

According to the New York Times, the Obama administration also required new background checks for visa applicants from Iraq after the Bowling Green incident. Lawmakers at a 2012 congressional hearing also indicated that the Department of Homeland Security expanded screening to the Iraqi refugees already settled in the United States.

See how the far left dronie mentality works?

There is nothing wrong with new background checks or expanded screening. I thought that was what this whole thing was supposed to be about? Obama put a limited halt on people coming from one country, but it wasn't a blanket country-wide ban--there were exceptions--and it had a specific antecedent.

 

[protectionist]

The first amendment . The whole establishment clause if you want to get specific . The gov can't favor one religion over another .

1. Islam is not a religion.

2. Even if it was, NOTHING can be supreme over the Constitution. As such, Islam is a violation of the US Constitution (Article 6, Section 2, part 1 - the Supremacy Clause)

3. We don't need a Muslim immigration ban - we already have one (I just mentioned it) And it bans more than than just Muslim immigration. It bans Islam entirely, in the US. Time to start enforcing it.

 

[protectionist]

There is nothing wrong with new background checks or expanded screening. I thought that was what this whole thing was supposed to be about? Obama put a limited halt on people coming from one country, but it wasn't a blanket country-wide ban--there were exceptions--and it had a specific antecedent.

That's what was wrong with it. It should be a blanket country-wide ban - on ALL Muslims. Why isn't that being done ?

 

[JoeMoma]

What exactly is so outrageous about finding out who is coming to our country? I find corrupt judges making political decisions they have no authority to make on baseless arguments much more outrageous and dangerous to our nation

Do you have some kind of law degree, maybe in constitutional law, or are you just talking out of your ass with zero knowledge of judicial procedures

Lots of stupid people have degrees. It does not take a law degree to understand the language of the constitution and the law that gives the president authority to make decisions about immigration.

Obviously it does, since you aint got a clue to what you are talking about. I love it when your kind knows more than the judiciary

If the judiciary always came up with the same decision rather than coming up with decisions 180 degrees apart you might have a point.

The judiciary is coming up with the same decision, each time

Maybe I should had been more precise by saying individual judges rather than judiciary. Many decisions of the supreme court are 5-4 where the opinions of 5 judges are 180 degrees opposed to the other 4, yet all 9 have law degrees.

 

[JoeMoma]

What exactly is so outrageous about finding out who is coming to our country? I find corrupt judges making political decisions they have no authority to make on baseless arguments much more outrageous and dangerous to our nation

Do you have some kind of law degree, maybe in constitutional law, or are you just talking out of your ass with zero knowledge of judicial procedures

Lots of stupid people have degrees. It does not take a law degree to understand the language of the constitution and the law that gives the president authority to make decisions about immigration.

Obviously it does, since you aint got a clue to what you are talking about. I love it when your kind knows more than the judiciary

If the judiciary always came up with the same decision rather than coming up with decisions 180 degrees apart you might have a point.

The judiciary is coming up with the same decision, each time

Also, it is not uncommon for a higher court to overturn the ruling of a lower court. Thus your statement is not true.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Hawaii and Maryland have put a STOP on Travel Ban 2.0 before it could take effect today. I say BRAVO!!!!

Maybe it is a political maneuver, "judicial overreach," as our President says, but if so, I'm glad there are still people in this country willing to go out on a limb and fight outrageous ideas such as the Executive Order, whether it is exactly within the scope of their job or not.

Last night Trump referred to 2.0 as a "watered down version" of his original E.O., which was lambasted by the courts on numerous fronts. Now he's making noise about going back to the original order--yeah, that should work well! It will be a sweet day when the Supreme Court tells him to quit shitting on the principles of this country and "BTW NO, you can't do this, so stop trying."

Trump could issue an EO that does nothing more than prohibit people from Iran bringing nuclear bombs into the country and the corrupt leftist judges in our absurd judiciary would block it.

BTW, can you show where the "principles of this country" were founded on admitting unvetted people intent on the destruction of the nation?

Oh, and hard times will befall these corrupt scum like Watson.

{
The Senate will confirm President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee before its Easter recess, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell asserted Thursday.

Trump nominated 10th U.S. Circuit Court Judge Neil Gorsuch on Jan. 31 to fill former Justice Antonin Scalia’s seat on the high court. Gorsuch’s confirmation hearings are slated to begin March 20, with Republicans aiming to have a final floor vote in April.}

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/15/us/politics/trump-travel-ban.html

 

[Asclepias]

Hawaii and Maryland have put a STOP on Travel Ban 2.0 before it could take effect today. I say BRAVO!!!!

Maybe it is a political maneuver, "judicial overreach," as our President says, but if so, I'm glad there are still people in this country willing to go out on a limb and fight outrageous ideas such as the Executive Order, whether it is exactly within the scope of their job or not.

Last night Trump referred to 2.0 as a "watered down version" of his original E.O., which was lambasted by the courts on numerous fronts. Now he's making noise about going back to the original order--yeah, that should work well! It will be a sweet day when the Supreme Court tells him to quit shitting on the principles of this country and "BTW NO, you can't do this, so stop trying."

Travel ban under Obama good, travel ban under Trump bad..

According to the New York Times, the Obama administration also required new background checks for visa applicants from Iraq after the Bowling Green incident. Lawmakers at a 2012 congressional hearing also indicated that the Department of Homeland Security expanded screening to the Iraqi refugees already settled in the United States.

See how the far left dronie mentality works?

I didnt see the word ban anywhere in there. WTF are you talking about?

 

[Kosh]

Hawaii and Maryland have put a STOP on Travel Ban 2.0 before it could take effect today. I say BRAVO!!!!

Maybe it is a political maneuver, "judicial overreach," as our President says, but if so, I'm glad there are still people in this country willing to go out on a limb and fight outrageous ideas such as the Executive Order, whether it is exactly within the scope of their job or not.

Last night Trump referred to 2.0 as a "watered down version" of his original E.O., which was lambasted by the courts on numerous fronts. Now he's making noise about going back to the original order--yeah, that should work well! It will be a sweet day when the Supreme Court tells him to quit shitting on the principles of this country and "BTW NO, you can't do this, so stop trying."

Travel ban under Obama good, travel ban under Trump bad..

According to the New York Times, the Obama administration also required new background checks for visa applicants from Iraq after the Bowling Green incident. Lawmakers at a 2012 congressional hearing also indicated that the Department of Homeland Security expanded screening to the Iraqi refugees already settled in the United States.

See how the far left dronie mentality works?

There is nothing wrong with new background checks or expanded screening. I thought that was what this whole thing was supposed to be about? Obama put a limited halt on people coming from one country, but it wasn't a blanket country-wide ban--there were exceptions--and it had a specific antecedent.

Wrong!

See how the far left will excuse Obama!

Yet they agree with Trump and don't even know it!

 

[Kosh]

Hawaii and Maryland have put a STOP on Travel Ban 2.0 before it could take effect today. I say BRAVO!!!!

Maybe it is a political maneuver, "judicial overreach," as our President says, but if so, I'm glad there are still people in this country willing to go out on a limb and fight outrageous ideas such as the Executive Order, whether it is exactly within the scope of their job or not.

Last night Trump referred to 2.0 as a "watered down version" of his original E.O., which was lambasted by the courts on numerous fronts. Now he's making noise about going back to the original order--yeah, that should work well! It will be a sweet day when the Supreme Court tells him to quit shitting on the principles of this country and "BTW NO, you can't do this, so stop trying."

Travel ban under Obama good, travel ban under Trump bad..

According to the New York Times, the Obama administration also required new background checks for visa applicants from Iraq after the Bowling Green incident. Lawmakers at a 2012 congressional hearing also indicated that the Department of Homeland Security expanded screening to the Iraqi refugees already settled in the United States.

See how the far left dronie mentality works?

I didnt see the word ban anywhere in there. WTF are you talking about?

Well far left drone that cheers for dead cops, you are right there is no word ban in Trumps orders..

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Hawaii and Maryland have put a STOP on Travel Ban 2.0 before it could take effect today. I say BRAVO!!!!

Maybe it is a political maneuver, "judicial overreach," as our President says, but if so, I'm glad there are still people in this country willing to go out on a limb and fight outrageous ideas such as the Executive Order, whether it is exactly within the scope of their job or not.

Last night Trump referred to 2.0 as a "watered down version" of his original E.O., which was lambasted by the courts on numerous fronts. Now he's making noise about going back to the original order--yeah, that should work well! It will be a sweet day when the Supreme Court tells him to quit shitting on the principles of this country and "BTW NO, you can't do this, so stop trying."

Trump could issue an EO that does nothing more than prohibit people from Iran bringing nuclear bombs into the country and the corrupt leftist judges in our absurd judiciary would block it.

BTW, can you show where the "principles of this country" were founded on admitting unvetted people intent on the destruction of the nation?

Oh, and hard times will befall these corrupt scum like Watson.

{
The Senate will confirm President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee before its Easter recess, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell asserted Thursday.

Trump nominated 10th U.S. Circuit Court Judge Neil Gorsuch on Jan. 31 to fill former Justice Antonin Scalia’s seat on the high court. Gorsuch’s confirmation hearings are slated to begin March 20, with Republicans aiming to have a final floor vote in April.}

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/15/us/politics/trump-travel-ban.html

Trump should screw with the lefties on this one. He should have the order rewritten, and the only change would be the ban be in place for six months. If some commie leftist judge strikes it down again, rewrite it for one year. Again? Rewrite it for two years.

After Trump gets the liberals up to five years, then let it go to the Supreme Court with Justice Gorsuch on the bench. That will teach these commie activist liberal judges.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

IKR? I hate he is trampling on the 1.7B muslims in those 6 countries constitutional rights.

It's about OUR gov targeting a specific religion. Which it can not do .

Please elaborate

The first amendment . The whole establishment clause if you want to get specific . The gov can't favor one religion over another .

How is this order doing that? Please, be specific again.

It targets these 6 majority Muslim countries. The reasons for doing so are dubious and really just pretext for the Dons true motives .

It doesn't matter what the motives are. He as President by law has the authority to do what he did.....twice. The problem is these leftists judges don't believe in our system of laws, so they move against them. This judge should be removed from the bench.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Trumps ban targets muslims . He's said so on many occasions . His own words are screwing him over .

His reasoning is not strong enough to get the court to bypass the 1st amendment.

IKR? I hate he is trampling on the 1.7B muslims in those 6 countries constitutional rights.

It's about OUR gov targeting a specific religion. Which it can not do .

Please elaborate

The first amendment . The whole establishment clause if you want to get specific . The gov can't favor one religion over another .

Foreigners overseas don't have Constitutional rights. If they did, that means if they come here for any reason, they would be allowed to own firearms and vote.