Thanks so much. I’m here all week, try the veal.
1 Like
Everyone who thinks people who don’t like something should leave need to realize it’s those people who stand and fight for what is right is why the USA isn’t still owned by England. Why it doesn’t still have legal slavery. Why dark skinned people and women can vote. They are the reason you are not all working in coal mines for poverty wages. The list is endless.
No they aren’t. His failures are being squarely placed on scapegoats.
Bwahahahaa calling someone not being a racist a racist while in fact saying something racist. Well played.
TRUMP MUSLIM BAN 2.0
Rejected again as unconstitutional.
Anybody feel that people trained in the law seem to think that banning or just giving special treatment to people based on birthplace is considered unconstitutional?
Ehhh it’s pretty gray from what I’ve heard (strictly out of legal minds). The problem is you only have to find 1 federal judge that falls on the Dem side of that gray since Trump doesn’t have the SCOTUS yet.
That being said, I really love watching the fat orange guy get pissed off. Best part of all of this is the 90 day mark is approaching where his first ban would have ran out, and we aren’t seeing any negative side effects of letting the scary brown people into our country.
1 Like
USA never did.
Several cultures have immigrated to the USA over the years and each have been met with hostility. The only immigrants who did any real damage get celebrated every November.
I don’t hate the US idiot, I hate the US government as well as all governments.
Governments as a whole do nothing but prey and exploit the populations they set out to serve including making debt slaves of the future unborn.
I don’t hate America, Americans, the country’s culture, customs or people.
The previous decision from the 9th circuit was thin. This one is thinner than anorexic tissue paper. On practically every point of the decision, they got it wrong.
This could very well result in a congressional trimming.
2 Likes
FUCKING THIS!!!
Thoughts on this? I mean that seems about as dictatory as humanly possible. Attacking the media for unflattering coverage is bad, but removing parts of the constitution that disagree with you?
The lower courts are not, strictly, a creature of the constitution. The courts have been trimmed before, and this type of obstructionism, on such shaky reasoning, may well force the administration’s hand.
They tailored the second order to the first decision and were struck down again on scurrilous reasoning. It is either that, or the administration moves ahead with appointing a SCJ and then appeal these decisions.
1 Like
Ultimately this is what needs to happen. I’m not super up to date on why his SCOTUS pick hasn’t been pushed through yet, but I think he’ll be forced to wait until he has a SCOTUS that will (maybe) work with him on this.
Although I am a fan of how he set himself up for another failure knowing full well he doesn’t have a SCOTUS to fall back on. God bless the big orange guy for trying though.
1 Like
To be fair, this level of judicial stonewalling could arguably have been unanticipated. Fool me once, though.
1 Like
If ban #2 was the first ban I’d 100% agree with you. Then again if Trump had run the 1st ban by someone other than himself and Bannon maybe they could have warned him. Even without consulting actual lawyers, they had to know it was a possibility on ban #1.
I know Trump isn’t a fan of giving details of any sort, but he might want to try it out. This whole “blindly follow and trust me” thing really only works with his base.
The first was, in my view, defensible. The 9th circuit decision was poor, but also defensible. I completely agree with you on Trump’s rollouts, which are laughable.
The second, however, was completely tailored to the supposed constitutional issues of the first order. I will get some of the choice quotes from the Hawaii decision, because it is utterly laughable.
1 Like
Ultimately I think it all boils down to the complete and utter lack of details (I feel like a broken record). Between the first and second ban failures, we’ve received basically zero insight into the WHY or HOW of the country selection or lack thereof.
Until such a time that he makes the people (you know, the ones that he’s responsible to) aware of his reasoning, I think you’ll always be able to find a judge that’s more afraid of Trump getting something through without being accountable than they are of looking stupid.
There is a ton of insight into why Trump does everything, follow Trump’s money. It is the one connecting line that consistently makes sense of the seemingly random dots.
Has the White House or DHS given any indication of how their new “extreme vetting” policy is shaping up? The first order banned immigrants from the seven countries for 90 days and 120 days for refugees. It’s been seven weeks since he signed the first ban. This new one could be held up by the courts for some time…possibly long enough to have had the new vetting procedure in place prior to resolution. So will Trump fight this to the end just to claim victory? Or will he actually follow through and have this policy in place by the end of next month?
Full decision is here. It is hogwash. [quote=“Tyler23, post:599, topic:225882”]
So will Trump fight this to the end just to claim victory? Or will he actually follow through and have this policy in place by the end of next month?
[/quote]
He should fight it, it is a bad decision. As for the vetting, I have no idea, but there was an article in the UK spectator about how one would craft such a policy, it was quite interesting, I’ll see if I can dig it up.
EDIT: Whoo boy, is this published decision bad. I am actually in awe of it.
1 Like
Still want the wall?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.mx/entry/trump-budget-border-wall_us_58ca1d43e4b0ec9d29d8acab
BTW most illegals come in legally and overstay visas.
Also, Mexican’s can and do dig.
And it is probably going to cost almost double of Trump’s predicted cost…and come out of US taxpayers pockets.
1 Like
Most of us aren’t surprised in the slightest by this.
5 Likes
I am definitely not surprised, it’s why I would have never voted for him and if I had voted for him I would not be currently supporting him.
Although part of me thinks he is playing a huge shell game. Look at all this bullshit over here while I gut programs and regulations that hinder my oil money or whatever else.
It’s really hard for me to think he is smart enough to pull that off and he is more likely a pawn for those people/corporations.