Immigration Ban

[Danny Bateman]

Nevermind, I'll just post the whole thing below.

 

[BigRedBuster]

[AR Husker Fan]

 

This has the potential to become explosive...

[ColoNoCoHusker]

Travel ban suspension upheld by US Appeals Court

 

 

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/09/appeals-court-to-issue-decision-on-trump-travel-ban-later-today.html

[knapplc]

So the court saw through the thin veneer of bigotry. Good for them.

 

Let's see what the Supremes do. (fingers crossed)

[Lil' Red]

Travel ban suspension upheld by US Appeals Court

 

 

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/09/appeals-court-to-issue-decision-on-trump-travel-ban-later-today.html

 

I think this pretty much means the ban in its current form is dead. With the Supreme Court the way it is, I think the best Trump could hope for is a 4-4 ruling which leaves this ruling in place.

[Whistlebritches]

 

Travel ban suspension upheld by US Appeals Court

 

 

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/09/appeals-court-to-issue-decision-on-trump-travel-ban-later-today.html

 

I think this pretty much means the ban in its current form is dead. With the Supreme Court the way it is, I think the best Trump could hope for is a 4-4 ruling which leave this ruling in place.

 

Or he looks for a way to immediately seat Gorsuch.

[ColoNoCoHusker]

I am curious if Trump ignores SCOTUS' ruling. We already saw Immigration & Homeland security agencies at Dulles ignore the initial court order. Since 2008, Republican party has undertaken massive research to fight Judicial Supremacy and document the Constitutionality of the Executive ignoring judiciary rulings. I wonder if Trump's admin tests all that research here...

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

 

Ooooooo....the little man is pissed.

[ColoNoCoHusker]

 

 

 

Ooooooo....the little man is pissed.

 

I know GSG was trying to explain cap lock Friday/eve to him...

[Moiraine]

I don't know if it'll matter. Roberts might vote against the ban and even Gorsuch might. Dunno enough about him.

[ColoNoCoHusker]

Here's the Court of Appeals full decision in case anyone wants to read it. It's quite interesting and sounds like Trump's defense was half-baked. The core of the US Government defense was:

 

The Government contends that the district court lacked authority to enjoin enforcement of the Executive Order because the President has “unreviewable authority to suspend the admission of any class of aliens.” The Government does not merely argue that courts owe substantial deference to the immigration and national security policy determinations of the political branches

 

The court replied with:

There is no precedent to support this claimed unreviewability, which runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy

 

They address discrimination, imminent threat, previous statement etc as well...

 

https://www.scribd.com/document/338917971/9th-Circuit-Travel-Ban-Stay-Ruling

[NM11046]

So his defense was the presidential/governmental version of "because I said so"? His lawyers and Bannon are sure steering him wrong.

[QMany]

[ColoNoCoHusker]

So his defense was the presidential/governmental version of "because I said so"? His lawyers and Bannon are sure steering him wrong.

 

Pretty much. Listening to the interviews from the Washington Solicitor General, he tears apart the Federal Government defense as ignoring reality and jurisprudence. If you read the decision (QMany - looking at you), the majority of the decision addresses the Judiciary's right to review the Executive.

 

The argument was Judiciary doesn't have the right to review; by reviewing the EO the Judiciary has irreparably injured the Government; the EO is preventing imminent danger without providing an example of upcoming danger. Total Keystone Cops