Trump wanted 90 days to sort out his immigration policy...

[Wyatt earp]

Hossfly How come its the old Navy guys like ThoughtCrime and ABikersailor that ALWAYS hate their country? What's the Navy teaching these traitors?

They have to been just little squids that got tossed out..

.

 

[Hossfly]

they are asking that oral arguments start a week from Monday

It's happening folks, did not expect to see them move this quick



Supreme Court Expedites Trump’s Petition on Executive Order Case - Breitbart

POP! That was your bubble. Certiorari has NOT BEEN GRANTED, and you should change your shorts after that premature ejaculation! SCOTUS is merely taking this extraordinary step to hear a review of the LEGAL merits of the case only, and may or may not grant the Writ.

"The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a petition for review at the Supreme Court on Thursday. Under the Court’s rules, a response from the plaintiffs would be due July 3. By that time the Court would be on recess for the summer, meaning that the justices would vote at the Court’s annual pre-Term conference, which will take place on September 25, on whether to take the case. That would typically mean hearing arguments in December or January, with a final decision coming down in early or mid-2018."
~~ Supreme Court Expedites Trump’s Petition on Executive Order Case - Breitbart ~~

IF SCOTUS agrees to HEAR the case after the review, the actual case won't even come before the Court for arguments until the end of the year at the earliest! That would make the 120 day active time for the ban moot as an over easy egg in a volcano caldera given the "extreme vetting process" would have been "perfected", n'est–ce pas?

That's not the point now is it?

Let me test that.....................................................................

Ok, I checked it out and given the author of the OP "... did not expect to see them [SCOTUS, sic] move this quick", wrongfully believing that Certiorari had been granted and arguments were going to be heard in less than ten(10) days regarding REVIEW of certain legal aspects concerning the grant or denial of the Writ.

AND that I pointed out that his timeline was wrong and absurdly optimistic, I'd say that the timing was the point of my post responding to his erroneous timeline and that you either did not listen to the person reading it to you attentively and/or didn't understand because there was more than one moving part, Bubba!

It's a slan dunk that the Supreme's will overturn this ..

And what if they don't agree to hear the case at the end of the year? What are the odds then, Bubba?

 

[dcbl]

they are asking that oral arguments start a week from Monday

It's happening folks, did not expect to see them move this quick



Supreme Court Expedites Trump’s Petition on Executive Order Case - Breitbart

POP! That was your bubble. Certiorari has NOT BEEN GRANTED, and you should change your shorts after that premature ejaculation! SCOTUS is merely taking this extraordinary step to hear a review of the LEGAL merits of the case only, and may or may not grant the Writ.

"The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a petition for review at the Supreme Court on Thursday. Under the Court’s rules, a response from the plaintiffs would be due July 3. By that time the Court would be on recess for the summer, meaning that the justices would vote at the Court’s annual pre-Term conference, which will take place on September 25, on whether to take the case. That would typically mean hearing arguments in December or January, with a final decision coming down in early or mid-2018."
~~ Supreme Court Expedites Trump’s Petition on Executive Order Case - Breitbart ~~

IF SCOTUS agrees to HEAR the case after the review, the actual case won't even come before the Court for arguments until the end of the year at the earliest! That would make the 120 day active time for the ban moot as an over easy egg in a volcano caldera given the "extreme vetting process" would have been "perfected", n'est–ce pas?

That's not the point now is it?

Let me test that.....................................................................

Ok, I checked it out and the author of the OP "... did not expect to see them [SCOTUS, sic] move this quick", wrongfully believing that Certiorari had been granted and arguments were going to be heard in less than ten(10) days regarding REVIEW of certain legal aspects concerning the grant or denial of the Writ.

AND that I pointed out that his timeline was wrong and absurdly optimistic, I'd say that the timing was the point of my post responding to his erroneous timeline and that you either did not listen to the person reading it to you attentively and/or didn't understand because there was more than one moving part, Bubba!

Your psuesdo intellectual superiority is real cute

Because it's always fun to see a real life & real time example of why Trump won this past election.

A few points:

I never claimed to be a lawyer, and not being an attorney does not invalidate my opinion

10-3 decision? That means that 3 jurists disagree with you. Also, I never mentioned or suggested that arguments would be heard in 10 days regarding REVIEW

These lower courts were hand picked for ideology - not surprising that they over stepped their authority re: the EOs

The language of the law is pretty clear, one does have to reach to imply intent based on campaign statements rather than ruling on the written order

My article stated that SCOTUS made a rare exception to expedite this case - I know you don't like Breitbart, but do you really dispute that?

My article also said that the case could be decided as early as this year, or perhaps mid 2018

Also, really cute using (sic), I suppose you are trying to tell me it is inaccurate to use SCOTUS as an acronym? Again, really cute display of arrogance and psuesdo intellectual superiority...

Anyway, you can pound sand yourself, you have demonstrated poor reading comprehension and have created a "straw man" by making assumptions about what I actuality said.

This will be decided by the high court, we'll see who winds up being correct

 

[dcbl]

Hossfly How come its the old Navy guys like ThoughtCrime and ABikersailor that ALWAYS hate their country? What's the Navy teaching these traitors?

They have to been just little squids that got tossed out..

.

Come on boys, that ain't fair

Admiral Rockwell (sp?) is damned solid on this site

 

[dcbl]

they are asking that oral arguments start a week from Monday

It's happening folks, did not expect to see them move this quick



Supreme Court Expedites Trump’s Petition on Executive Order Case - Breitbart

POP! That was your bubble. Certiorari has NOT BEEN GRANTED, and you should change your shorts after that premature ejaculation! SCOTUS is merely taking this extraordinary step to hear a review of the LEGAL merits of the case only, and may or may not grant the Writ.

"The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a petition for review at the Supreme Court on Thursday. Under the Court’s rules, a response from the plaintiffs would be due July 3. By that time the Court would be on recess for the summer, meaning that the justices would vote at the Court’s annual pre-Term conference, which will take place on September 25, on whether to take the case. That would typically mean hearing arguments in December or January, with a final decision coming down in early or mid-2018."
~~ Supreme Court Expedites Trump’s Petition on Executive Order Case - Breitbart ~~

IF SCOTUS agrees to HEAR the case after the review, the actual case won't even come before the Court for arguments until the end of the year at the earliest! That would make the 120 day active time for the ban moot as an over easy egg in a volcano caldera given the "extreme vetting process" would have been "perfected", n'est–ce pas?

That's not the point now is it?

Let me test that.....................................................................

Ok, I checked it out and given the author of the OP "... did not expect to see them [SCOTUS, sic] move this quick", wrongfully believing that Certiorari had been granted and arguments were going to be heard in less than ten(10) days regarding REVIEW of certain legal aspects concerning the grant or denial of the Writ.

AND that I pointed out that his timeline was wrong and absurdly optimistic, I'd say that the timing was the point of my post responding to his erroneous timeline and that you either did not listen to the person reading it to you attentively and/or didn't understand because there was more than one moving part, Bubba!

It's a slan dunk that the Supreme's will overturn this ..

And what if they don't agree to hear the case at the end of the year? What are the odds then, Bubba?

That's highly unlikely and you should know it...

 

[DarkFury]

Hossfly How come its the old Navy guys like ThoughtCrime and ABikersailor that ALWAYS hate their country? What's the Navy teaching these traitors?

They have to been just little squids that got tossed out..

.

Come on boys, that ain't fair

Admiral Rockwell (sp?) is damned solid on this site

True enough yes. But we do seem to have some "supposed" X Navy who are barely more the Communists. I THINK it was bear513 and I on a thread realized he was NOT X Navy. He could not even remember basic stuff.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

they are asking that oral arguments start a week from Monday

It's happening folks, did not expect to see them move this quick



Supreme Court Expedites Trump’s Petition on Executive Order Case - Breitbart

POP! That was your bubble. Certiorari has NOT BEEN GRANTED, and you should change your shorts after that premature ejaculation! SCOTUS is merely taking this extraordinary step to hear a review of the LEGAL merits of the case only, and may or may not grant the Writ.

"The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a petition for review at the Supreme Court on Thursday. Under the Court’s rules, a response from the plaintiffs would be due July 3. By that time the Court would be on recess for the summer, meaning that the justices would vote at the Court’s annual pre-Term conference, which will take place on September 25, on whether to take the case. That would typically mean hearing arguments in December or January, with a final decision coming down in early or mid-2018."
~~ Supreme Court Expedites Trump’s Petition on Executive Order Case - Breitbart ~~

IF SCOTUS agrees to HEAR the case after the review, the actual case won't even come before the Court for arguments until the end of the year at the earliest! That would make the 120 day active time for the ban moot as an over easy egg in a volcano caldera given the "extreme vetting process" would have been "perfected", n'est–ce pas?

That's not the point now is it?

Let me test that.....................................................................

Ok, I checked it out and the author of the OP "... did not expect to see them [SCOTUS, sic] move this quick", wrongfully believing that Certiorari had been granted and arguments were going to be heard in less than ten(10) days regarding REVIEW of certain legal aspects concerning the grant or denial of the Writ.

AND that I pointed out that his timeline was wrong and absurdly optimistic, I'd say that the timing was the point of my post responding to his erroneous timeline and that you either did not listen to the person reading it to you attentively and/or didn't understand because there was more than one moving part, Bubba!

Your psuesdo intellectual superiority is real cute

Because it's always fun to see a real life & real time example of why Trump won this past election.

A few points:

I never claimed to be a lawyer, and not being an attorney does not invalidate my opinion

10-3 decision? That means that 3 jurists disagree with you. Also, I never mentioned or suggested that arguments would be heard in 10 days regarding REVIEW

These lower courts were hand picked for ideology - not surprising that they over stepped their authority re: the EOs

The language of the law is pretty clear, one does have to reach to imply intent based on campaign statements rather than ruling on the written order

My article stated that SCOTUS made a rare exception to expedite this case - I know you don't like Breitbart, but do you really dispute that?

My article also said that the case could be decided as early as this year, or perhaps mid 2018

Also, really cute using (sic), I suppose you are trying to tell me it is inaccurate to use SCOTUS as an acronym? Again, really cute display of arrogance and psuesdo intellectual superiority...

Anyway, you can pound sand yourself, you have demonstrated poor reading comprehension and have created a "straw man" by making assumptions about what I actuality said.

This will be decided by the high court, we'll see who winds up being correct

Hey, shit for brains, you responded to a post I sent to Bubba Bear, as if it was sent to you. Nice piece of work, asshole! Confused often? Have you been screened for dementia?

 

[HenryBHough]

Foreigners here legally do have such rights, one of those being able to go about their business lawfully in the country and out of it and back.

Legally.

A word that so few seem to understand.

 

[dcbl]

they are asking that oral arguments start a week from Monday

It's happening folks, did not expect to see them move this quick



Supreme Court Expedites Trump’s Petition on Executive Order Case - Breitbart

POP! That was your bubble. Certiorari has NOT BEEN GRANTED, and you should change your shorts after that premature ejaculation! SCOTUS is merely taking this extraordinary step to hear a review of the LEGAL merits of the case only, and may or may not grant the Writ.

"The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a petition for review at the Supreme Court on Thursday. Under the Court’s rules, a response from the plaintiffs would be due July 3. By that time the Court would be on recess for the summer, meaning that the justices would vote at the Court’s annual pre-Term conference, which will take place on September 25, on whether to take the case. That would typically mean hearing arguments in December or January, with a final decision coming down in early or mid-2018."
~~ Supreme Court Expedites Trump’s Petition on Executive Order Case - Breitbart ~~

IF SCOTUS agrees to HEAR the case after the review, the actual case won't even come before the Court for arguments until the end of the year at the earliest! That would make the 120 day active time for the ban moot as an over easy egg in a volcano caldera given the "extreme vetting process" would have been "perfected", n'est–ce pas?

That's not the point now is it?

Let me test that.....................................................................

Ok, I checked it out and the author of the OP "... did not expect to see them [SCOTUS, sic] move this quick", wrongfully believing that Certiorari had been granted and arguments were going to be heard in less than ten(10) days regarding REVIEW of certain legal aspects concerning the grant or denial of the Writ.

AND that I pointed out that his timeline was wrong and absurdly optimistic, I'd say that the timing was the point of my post responding to his erroneous timeline and that you either did not listen to the person reading it to you attentively and/or didn't understand because there was more than one moving part, Bubba!

Your psuesdo intellectual superiority is real cute

Because it's always fun to see a real life & real time example of why Trump won this past election.

A few points:

I never claimed to be a lawyer, and not being an attorney does not invalidate my opinion

10-3 decision? That means that 3 jurists disagree with you. Also, I never mentioned or suggested that arguments would be heard in 10 days regarding REVIEW

These lower courts were hand picked for ideology - not surprising that they over stepped their authority re: the EOs

The language of the law is pretty clear, one does have to reach to imply intent based on campaign statements rather than ruling on the written order

My article stated that SCOTUS made a rare exception to expedite this case - I know you don't like Breitbart, but do you really dispute that?

My article also said that the case could be decided as early as this year, or perhaps mid 2018

Also, really cute using (sic), I suppose you are trying to tell me it is inaccurate to use SCOTUS as an acronym? Again, really cute display of arrogance and psuesdo intellectual superiority...

Anyway, you can pound sand yourself, you have demonstrated poor reading comprehension and have created a "straw man" by making assumptions about what I actuality said.

This will be decided by the high court, we'll see who winds up being correct

Hey, shit for brains, you responded to a post I sent to Bubba Bear, as if it was sent to you. Nice piece of work, asshole! Confused often? Have you been screened for dementia?

You really need a new hobby, you're not very good at this

You referenced me and made shit up that I didn't say

And now you are crumbling with lame personal attacks

I understand that you are frustrated, people that can't adequately express themselves get upset quite often

Maybe it's time to find something you're good at that you can enjoy

 

[frigidweirdo]

He wanted 90 days of a ban for people from certain Muslim countries. He said he needed those 90 days in order to have the time to make a concrete policy. Well, 90 days has come and gone, and a concrete policy isn't here. In fact, he's going to the Supreme Court in order to get the 90 day imposed.

Trump's immigration ban sends shockwaves - CNNPolitics.com

Do any of Trump's lies register with his lemmings? He lies right in their face and they're like "which way did he go, which way did he go". It's been 90 days and there has been nothing to stop the administration from coming up with 'a concrete policy'. Why hasn't this been done? The ban is not needed now it's past 90 days. If it had gone into place it would now have been lifted.

Lying Donald.

The problem for Trump is that he just wants to win something, anything....

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The Buffoon is such a charade.

And yet, he's feeding you people curb sandwiches everyday. So amusing.

like what; at this rate, this could be the "most expensive administration" in our history, since they have nothing but repeal and are striving to be, the Party of Increased Litigation.

Democrats want it to be the administration destroyed by Democrat obstruction.

 

[Cellblock2429]

So the court might hear the case in October. Maybe. That's way past the 90 days Trump said the government needed to "figure out what's going on." It will be over 300 days from Trump's order before the SC issues a decision. Is Trump so incompetent that he won't have "figured out what's going on" by then?

Laughable. What a waste of everybodies time.

Agree, Trump's lawful EOs should have been left intact to start with

Good point baw

Except they weren't lawful. He fucked himself when he stated on the campaign trail that he was going to ban Muslims from the U.S. What part of "there shall be no religious test" do you not get?

/----- When will Obozo go to prison for the lies he told on the campaign trail about Obozocare?

 

[OKTexas]

He wanted 90 days of a ban for people from certain Muslim countries. He said he needed those 90 days in order to have the time to make a concrete policy. Well, 90 days has come and gone, and a concrete policy isn't here. In fact, he's going to the Supreme Court in order to get the 90 day imposed.

Trump's immigration ban sends shockwaves - CNNPolitics.com

Hey Frigid what happened to the Extreme Vetting...? He slammed Obama everyday for that...

Banning from the countries he doesn't do business in is Complete bullshit, and this cabinet knew that it would be blocked.

By Andrew Blake - The Washington Times - Friday, June 2, 2017
The State Department has implemented a new vetting process requiring certain visa applicants to give the government a list of their email addresses and social media handles, much to the chagrin of immigration attorneys and free-speech advocates.

Foreigners seeking American visas may now be asked to answer a supplemental questionnaire requesting biographical information including addresses, employment and travel histories, as well as five years’ worth of social media handles and email addresses, according to a policy change quietly put in place by the Trump administration last week.


.

 

[OKTexas]

Good that you are reminding us how activist dems take law into their hands and endanger lives without any remorse. Something should be done about this, absolutely. There is no way that Trump should send the wrong message in and let them have their way.

So... how many people have come into the US and killed people in the last 100 days or so?

Ask England how it's worked for them the last few weeks.

.

 

[OKTexas]

He wanted 90 days of a ban for people from certain Muslim countries. He said he needed those 90 days in order to have the time to make a concrete policy. Well, 90 days has come and gone, and a concrete policy isn't here. In fact, he's going to the Supreme Court in order to get the 90 day imposed.

Trump's immigration ban sends shockwaves - CNNPolitics.com

I have to agree. Now it is going to the SCOTUS, but, if you needed 90 days to come up with a way to deal with these countries who cannot vet the people they would send over, couldn't that have already been done? So what's the point? Those 90 days are past and no one has hit us yet. But then, I am not there to know everything.

The calendar is irrelevant, they can't allow the precedent to stand.

.

 

[OKTexas]

So the court might hear the case in October. Maybe. That's way past the 90 days Trump said the government needed to "figure out what's going on." It will be over 300 days from Trump's order before the SC issues a decision. Is Trump so incompetent that he won't have "figured out what's going on" by then?

Laughable. What a waste of everybodies time.

Agree, Trump's lawful EOs should have been left intact to start with

Good point baw

Except they weren't lawful. He fucked himself when he stated on the campaign trail that he was going to ban Muslims from the U.S. What part of "there shall be no religious test" do you not get?

It's a country test and show me in the law where it says there can't be a religious test if the president determines foreigners of that religion are a potential threat.

(f)Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

 

[dcbl]

So the court might hear the case in October. Maybe. That's way past the 90 days Trump said the government needed to "figure out what's going on." It will be over 300 days from Trump's order before the SC issues a decision. Is Trump so incompetent that he won't have "figured out what's going on" by then?

Laughable. What a waste of everybodies time.

Agree, Trump's lawful EOs should have been left intact to start with

Good point baw

Except they weren't lawful. He fucked himself when he stated on the campaign trail that he was going to ban Muslims from the U.S. What part of "there shall be no religious test" do you not get?

It's a country test and show me in the law where it says there can't be a religious test if the president determines foreigners of that religion are a potential threat.

(f)Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

Our friends on the left get confused by simple English fairly often

Seems kind of strange...

 

[Eaglewings]

He wanted 90 days of a ban for people from certain Muslim countries. He said he needed those 90 days in order to have the time to make a concrete policy. Well, 90 days has come and gone, and a concrete policy isn't here. In fact, he's going to the Supreme Court in order to get the 90 day imposed.

Trump's immigration ban sends shockwaves - CNNPolitics.com

Hey Frigid what happened to the Extreme Vetting...? He slammed Obama everyday for that...

Banning from the countries he doesn't do business in is Complete bullshit, and this cabinet knew that it would be blocked.

By Andrew Blake - The Washington Times - Friday, June 2, 2017
The State Department has implemented a new vetting process requiring certain visa applicants to give the government a list of their email addresses and social media handles, much to the chagrin of immigration attorneys and free-speech advocates.

Foreigners seeking American visas may now be asked to answer a supplemental questionnaire requesting biographical information including addresses, employment and travel histories, as well as five years’ worth of social media handles and email addresses, according to a policy change quietly put in place by the Trump administration last week.


.

Very easy for the terrorists to get fake addresses and email accounts.

 

[OKTexas]

He wanted 90 days of a ban for people from certain Muslim countries. He said he needed those 90 days in order to have the time to make a concrete policy. Well, 90 days has come and gone, and a concrete policy isn't here. In fact, he's going to the Supreme Court in order to get the 90 day imposed.

Trump's immigration ban sends shockwaves - CNNPolitics.com

Hey Frigid what happened to the Extreme Vetting...? He slammed Obama everyday for that...

Banning from the countries he doesn't do business in is Complete bullshit, and this cabinet knew that it would be blocked.

By Andrew Blake - The Washington Times - Friday, June 2, 2017
The State Department has implemented a new vetting process requiring certain visa applicants to give the government a list of their email addresses and social media handles, much to the chagrin of immigration attorneys and free-speech advocates.

Foreigners seeking American visas may now be asked to answer a supplemental questionnaire requesting biographical information including addresses, employment and travel histories, as well as five years’ worth of social media handles and email addresses, according to a policy change quietly put in place by the Trump administration last week.


.

Very easy for the terrorists to get fake addresses and email accounts.

It's a bit harder to create a history with it.


.

 

[frigidweirdo]

So the court might hear the case in October. Maybe. That's way past the 90 days Trump said the government needed to "figure out what's going on." It will be over 300 days from Trump's order before the SC issues a decision. Is Trump so incompetent that he won't have "figured out what's going on" by then?

Laughable. What a waste of everybodies time.

Agree, Trump's lawful EOs should have been left intact to start with

Good point baw

Except they weren't lawful. He fucked himself when he stated on the campaign trail that he was going to ban Muslims from the U.S. What part of "there shall be no religious test" do you not get?

It's a country test and show me in the law where it says there can't be a religious test if the president determines foreigners of that religion are a potential threat.

(f)Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

Our friends on the left get confused by simple English fairly often

Seems kind of strange...

Or maybe when the Republicans played dirty, they should have realized that there are no rules anymore. It's called consequences.