Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trumps new immigration order struck down by a federal court

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #61
    Originally posted by Landrover View Post
    Just like I believe the primary ownership of the multi nationals (5x bigger than Trumps corporation) I have worked for during my career have ANY idea how I live..........LOL! Like I stated earlier.........HUGE misnomer in our society.
    Originally posted by boblee View Post
    Well, the judges did tie things together somehow and they said no you can't do that Donald J., it's unconstitutional.

    And the law is their line of work. You'll have to take it up with them.


    Bob Lee
    Bob, that's the most logical argument you can make? Has a federal judge NEVER misconstrued the constitution and been overruled ?

    I think the Hawaii judges ruling was weak claiming 1st amendment reasons. The 6 countries cited are the 6 most conflict countries in the world and produce the majority Middle East extremist, but only account for less than 10% of the world's Muslims. You know what that means? 91% of the worlds muslims are welcome and available for immigration status. How is that predjudice against a religion?

    The Maryland judge may actually have a valid argument, but I'm not familiar with nor can I find a specific citing of the federal law already active that he says the EO violates.

    C'mon bob lee you are more cerebral than "the judge ruled, so it must be alright."

    Comment


      #62
      Originally posted by Playa View Post
      Bob, that's the most logical argument you can make? Has a federal judge NEVER misconstrued the constitution and been overruled ?

      I think the Hawaii judges ruling was weak claiming 1st amendment reasons. The 6 countries cited are the 6 most conflict countries in the world and produce the majority Middle East extremist, but only account for less than 10% of the world's Muslims. You know what that means? 91% of the worlds muslims are welcome and available for immigration status. How is that predjudice against a religion?

      The Maryland judge may actually have a valid argument, but I'm not familiar with nor can I find a specific citing of the federal law already active that he says the EO violates.

      C'mon bob lee you are more cerebral than "the judge ruled, so it must be alright."

      No, I can't come up with a better argument because I'm not a legal scholar. I can only say that from my unschooled point of view that I have to rely on logic. It appears to me that the order discriminates entry to our US based upon the individuals' religious beliefs.
      And all federal judges that have reviewed the order and made rulings seem to think so also. Which circuit and whether they be a republican or a democrat appointed judge doesn't appear to affect their rulings. So far, Trump is 0 and however many (lost count). Consequently, because I do arithmetic for a living, I cannot and won't disagree.

      If I have nothing else going for me, I am honest. With that admitted, I will continue to admit that I don't really care so much whether or not we accept any immigrant from anywhere. I just want Trump to held to our Constitution and our rules of law. And he doesn't think that he can be.

      Judicial Branch, show him that is the way that our system works. And show him every time that he tries to get too big for his ill-fitted and poorly tailored britches.

      I never intended to get so involved in this particular discussion. I gotta get to bed now. We can take it up tomorrow or next week or next month, whenever I get in the mood or feel inclined to chat some more. On a scale between 0 and 10, the greenscreen is between the number of 1 and 1 and a half in my life.


      Bob Lee

      Comment


        #63
        I find it strange that Obama met with this judge the day before he came up with this decision. They are college buddies after all.

        Comment


          #64
          Originally posted by Playa View Post
          Bob, that's the most logical argument you can make? Has a federal judge NEVER misconstrued the constitution and been overruled ?

          I think the Hawaii judges ruling was weak claiming 1st amendment reasons. The 6 countries cited are the 6 most conflict countries in the world and produce the majority Middle East extremist, but only account for less than 10% of the world's Muslims. You know what that means? 91% of the worlds muslims are welcome and available for immigration status. How is that predjudice against a religion?

          The Maryland judge may actually have a valid argument, but I'm not familiar with nor can I find a specific citing of the federal law already active that he says the EO violates.

          C'mon bob lee you are more cerebral than "the judge ruled, so it must be alright."
          He is not an ignorant man and im sure the others trying to make the argument the Trump does not know what he is doing are not either. Their problem is Trump does not have a D next to his name. These federal judges know full well they can play politics becsuse their careers are set in stone. These judges dont care about the American people or the law any more than Obama or Nancy, Hillary do. And anyone that condones this activity i find it hard to believe they care about the country as well.

          Comment


            #65
            Originally posted by Draco View Post
            I find it strange that Obama met with this judge the day before he came up with this decision. They are college buddies after all.
            That's interesting, i had not heard that

            Comment


              #66
              Originally posted by boblee View Post
              Yes, there is. It is based upon the First Amendment of the Constitution of The United States of America. Which dictates freedom of religion - and freedom of irreligion.



              Certainly, I've not read the executive order. That said; I expect somewhere in the order there is some verbiage that the reviewing (dissenting) judges picked up on. And they find the campaign rhetoric that Trump spewed out loud and often is impossible to leave out of the game. And there's no denying that the order was prepared by pure amateurs. Namely, Bannon and that other little chicken **** (his name eludes me) that would more be appropriately dressed and entirely suited (no pun intended) Nazi SS outfit.



              That is, objectively, the way I see it. Hey, guys... I'm all for a carefully controlled, vetted and limited immigration policy. But a spade is a spade is a spade. The order fails the True Test / aka / First Amendment. Hell, I barely managed to graduate from college with a major not even remotely close to a law degree can see the obvious.





              Bob Lee


              I haven't read the order either but I do not believe there is any basis in fact that it's is related to anti religious reasons.

              IMO this judge is applying his opinion rather than fact of law.


              Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

              Comment


                #67
                Title 8, Chapter 12, US Code 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.

                Comment


                  #68
                  Originally posted by LFD2037 View Post
                  Title 8, Chapter 12, US Code 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.
                  You think your Constitutionally sanctioned Laws over power feelings? Ha, you are crazy.

                  Comment


                    #69
                    Originally posted by J Sweet View Post
                    You think your Constitutionally sanctioned Laws over power feelings? Ha, you are crazy.
                    I just keep posting it because
                    a) it pertains to the title of this thread
                    b) there's a few in this thread who obviously haven't read it
                    It's clear as day that what he did is 100% legal & constitutional yet they are blinded by their liberalism (or is it libertarianism? Those 2 seem to run together for some folks).
                    The 9th Circus needs to be drained. They truly interpret the law as they see fit & run w/it. They have chosen, many times, to 'write' the law, not enforce it. They need to be slapped in the face w/the Constitution until they can't see BHO in their wet dreams anymore. They suck & are helping create the demise of this country to simply satisfy their immoral & corrupted views of reality.

                    Comment


                      #70
                      Its liberalism. Real libertarians are constitutionalists.

                      Comment


                        #71
                        Originally posted by J Sweet View Post
                        Its liberalism. Real libertarians are constitutionalists.
                        double tap
                        Last edited by LFD2037; 03-17-2017, 11:26 AM.

                        Comment


                          #72
                          Originally posted by J Sweet View Post
                          Its liberalism. Real libertarians are constitutionalists.
                          Exactly.
                          I just posted pretty much this exact thing on your survey thread!

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X