Federal judge blocks new Trump travel ban

[American]

Well God dammit then we should ban people from Saudi Arabia! But then we won't because Trump's family is heavily invested in SA.

Was Obama's family, Bush's family, Clinton's family and every other president since WWII heavily invested? That country has been treat with kid gloves since then, don't kid yourself.

 

[Athanasius68]

Silly rabbit. The bad apples caught before any event took place were done before any “exteme vetting” was “vested’. That’s proof that how things were done is and has been working. Which is the purpose of my questioning you. There is not enough evidence of damage to justify “extreme vetting”. Now, try and find a box of Trix that someone won’t take from you.

If I've not answered to all you've posted to your satisfaction, please let me know. And I will.

Justify to whom? Those judges?

 

[American]

Yes, really. Why is that funny? Haven't you had friends for a long time? I have.

The fact that you don't see a coincidence. Is keeping Obama clean that important to you? If you haven't figured out that he's a huge ideologue after 8 years, then you just haven't paid attention. Just happened to visiting an old buddy in Hawaii......uh huh.

 

[tres borrachos]

The fact that you don't see a coincidence. Is keeping Obama clean that important to you? If you haven't figured out that he's a huge ideologue after 8 years, then you just haven't paid attention. Just happened to visiting an old buddy in Hawaii......uh huh.

Coincidence? I saw one person - that blogger you posted or whatever he is - try to drum up the conspiracy. Nobody else - not even the President who seems to enjoy lying about his predecessor - is trying to tie Obama to this.

This belongs in the conspiracy theory forum, but something tells me you already knew that. I don't engage in conspiracy theories, and I tend to laugh at them. As I'm laughing at this one.

 

[ttwtt78640]

It's appears that the Hawaiian judge may have met with Obama the day before he issued a restraining order. I hope this is confirmed.

Well well well. Look who the Hawaii judge met with before ruling against Trump's executive order * USA Newsflash

They were likely just discussing golf and future grandchildren.

 

[American]

They were likely just discussing golf and future grandchildren.

Of course!

 

[chromium]

That (bolded above) is precisely my point. Had Trump simply said I will temporarily ban travel of those from nations in which we and our allies are fighting ISIS and/or AQ instead of nations that contain mostly Muslims then he would likely not have been stopped. It was Trumps (stupid?) repeated statements that he would ban Muslims from easily entering the U.S. that have caused this mess.

Was it stupid if it helped get him "elected"? Sure it stopped his scheming now, but i doubt he actually cares if muslims are banned from the country, and he can just tell his deplorable base that he tried to ban the muslims, and they'll just blame the judges. In fact this probably is the best outcome as i can see tourism rebounding if the bans aren't allowed, which would put states like florida at risk in 2020. At most, this ruling hurts his ego

What could far more likely jeopardize he reelection is the health care debacle if 30 million more lose insurance. He probably wants to beat the **** out of Ryan right now

 

[ttwtt78640]

Was it stupid if it helped get him "elected"? Sure it stopped his scheming now, but i doubt he actually cares if muslims are banned from the country, and he can just tell his deplorable base that he tried to ban the muslims, and they'll just blame the judges. In fact this probably is the best outcome as i can see tourism rebounding if the bans aren't allowed, which would put states like florida at risk in 2020. At most, this ruling hurts his ego

What could far more likely jeopardize he reelection is the health care debacle if 30 million more lose insurance. He probably wants to beat the **** out of Ryan right now

I would imagine that whatever Trump meant by "extreme vetting" will suffer the same fate at the hands of "activist" judges. Trump will be judged on outcome no matter who he tries to blame if that outcome is not good.

 

[chromium]

In terms of the delaying tactic, I am making an educated guess. This is just MY opinion. I obviously have no evidence to support my opinion outside of the logical case I presented. With that being said, your rebuttal to my opinion falls flat. You are insinuating that because they made a change to the original executive order, that somehow proves my opinion incorrect. However, in order to delay the appeal to the SC, didn't they have to make a significant change to the original order? Furthermore, it is likely that they were hopeful that the second order would pass without need for appeal. Putting it before the SC is still a risk, no matter how confident one may be.

No, if they wanted to be Gorsuch is in first, he could have just made the 1st EO *after* the confirmation. There would be no need to delay then. Isn't there plenty evidence that Trump's arrogance is beyond any limits to go with the simplest explanation, that he had no idea what he was doing legally and even didn't care? As for the 2nd EO, like i said, politically he had to save face and go forward with it

 

[chromium]

It's a privilege to come here, not a right. Your problem is that you don't see it that way.

i realize this thread is long but i already said it's a privilege (legally, not morally or practically). But it's also illegal to discriminate or to establish a preferred religion. Your problem is you can't see THAT

 

[chromium]

I would imagine that whatever Trump meant by "extreme vetting" will suffer the same fate at the hands of "activist" judges. Trump will be judged on outcome no matter who he tries to blame if that outcome is not good.

He might. It happened to the north carolina governor after the backlash hit, even though he tried to argue he was just putting up the good conservative fight and "activist judges" and etc. We'll just have to see

 

[notquiteright]

Not possible. The Judge said the temporary hold on travel was a Muslim ban. Apparently trump hate causes a mental condition that invents things that don't exist.

YUGELY possible... Trump and his minions repeatedly called it a Muslim ban. There is a rather numerous series of videos where they do just that. Trump worship causes a mental condition where those affected reject what their 'lying eyes' show them and only listen to the voices of their Dear Leader... eace

 

[American]

i realize this thread is long but i already said it's a privilege (legally, not morally or practically). But it's also illegal to discriminate or to establish a preferred religion. Your problem is you can't see THAT

It's not about religion, it's about terrorism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965

If you read this act, those the promised we would not have problems from this acts modification to the 1952 act, were wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Reform_and_Control_Act_of_1986

Furthermore this act exacerbated the situation with illegals and refugees.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182

(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. Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline.

Under this provision the President has power to temporarily withhold admission to aliens.

 

[ocean515]

YUGELY possible... Trump and his minions repeatedly called it a Muslim ban. There is a rather numerous series of videos where they do just that. Trump worship causes a mental condition where those affected reject what their 'lying eyes' show them and only listen to the voices of their Dear Leader... eace

There is no Muslim ban. Click your heals all you want, there is no way to get home on that claim.

Must be the Progressive fairies whispering directives in the ears of the gullible they attract. :tink:

 

[notquiteright]

There is no Muslim ban. Click your heals all you want, there is no way to get home on that claim. Must be the Progressive fairies whispering directives in the ears of the gullible they attract.

There is no Muslim ban because our courts have blocked both attempts... :roll:

Trump worshipers refuse to believe the multiple videos of Trump and his minions calling the EO a Muslim Ban, of Trump promising a Muslim ban when elected... Must be the rabid right wearing blinders while listening to the wonky rantings of a former Reality TV star... eace

 

[chromium]

It's not about religion, it's about terrorism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965

If you read this act, those the promised we would not have problems from this acts modification to the 1952 act, were wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Reform_and_Control_Act_of_1986

Furthermore this act exacerbated the situation with illegals and refugees.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182



Under this provision the President has power to temporarily withhold admission to aliens.

No idea what you're trying to argue. The court ruling declared that the EO violated the prohibition of discriminating against religion in the 1965 act. If you think that act was unjust or the purpose of the EO was not to ban muslims, whatever

 

[gmeyers1944]

What?

When has there ever been a quorum necessary on law? You want to hold a vote on every directive Stupid puts out? Of course it only takes one judge...until it's challenged in a higher court.

If this law has any jam then it will be appealed. I say no, they won't try it, but bring in yet another try at denying members of a religion their rights.

You're arguing against the United States Constitution and in favor of tyranny

You are barking up the wrong tree. The Countries on this ban are not able to properly vet those desiring to come to America. We need to prevent terrorists from coming to America. There is nothing in the ban that can be construed as establishing a religion. What President Trump said during the presidential campaign is irrelevant. President Trump is allowed to ban people he believes to be a threat. President Obama exercised this right.

 

[gmeyers1944]

No idea what you're trying to argue. The court ruling declared that the EO violated the prohibition of discriminating against religion in the 1965 act. If you think that act was unjust or the purpose of the EO was not to ban muslims, whatever

The act does NOT discriminate against Muslims. It applies to Christians as well. ANYBODY from these countries will not be allowed during the ban.

 

[gmeyers1944]

What could far more likely jeopardize he reelection is the health care debacle if 30 million more lose insurance. He probably wants to beat the **** out of Ryan right now

What will result if President Trump's health care bill is a resounding success?

 

[haymarket]

What will result if President Trump's health care bill is a resounding success?

How is that even possible given the realities that this is NOT a health care bill to provide actual health care or insurance e for health care but an attempt to keep a campaign promise and the heath care aspect is secondary and nearly incidental?

 

[Athanasius68]

There is no Muslim ban because our courts have blocked both attempts... :roll:

Trump worshipers refuse to believe the multiple videos of Trump and his minions calling the EO a Muslim Ban, of Trump promising a Muslim ban when elected... Must be the rabid right wearing blinders while listening to the wonky rantings of a former Reality TV star... eace

What do thd opinions of the "minions" of Trump have to do with it?

 

[gmeyers1944]

Good grief- it's s swing and a miss.... :doh

What the Judge says is you can't block entry based SOLELY on nationality... :2wave:

We should base it on the INDIVIDUAL. This isn't a war on Trump but on bigotry and pandering to our basest emotions. That Trump wants to be the poster child for that bigotry is something the Judge can't control... eace

Terrorists can board a plane to America, unvetted, from the countries in the ban. I don't care what religion they adhere to. They can do dastardly deeds when they get here. Are you good with that? I hope not.

 

[Master PO]

And clearly, plenty of other judges disagree with him.

so other judges disagree, you base decisions on what a person says, instead of on what is the law?

 

[Athanasius68]

No idea what you're trying to argue. The court ruling declared that the EO violated the prohibition of discriminating against religion in the 1965 act. If you think that act was unjust or the purpose of the EO was not to ban muslims, whatever

Neither of the EOs banned Muslims.
The 1965 law was about immigration. The EO'S were about national security, not immigration. The 1965 law did not preclude the president from making national security decisions about foregners entry into the USA.

 

[Athanasius68]

Terrorists can board a plane to America, unvetted, from the countries in the ban. I don't care what their religion they adhere to. They can do dastardly deeds when they get here. Are you good with that? I hope not.

This is not so. There are vetting systems in place. The problem Trump faced were intelligence reports from Obama admin that people from those named countries were trying to work around the existing systems. The travel ban was to give time to review whether those existing systems are up to snuff.