Federal judge halts Trump’s Muslim ban

Think Progress (don't know about them) ^ | January 28, 2017 | Judd Legum

[MamaB]

Is this the judge appointed by Obama?

[Hostage]

> “... people being held at the airports, and the order only applies to them.”

Wrong! Try again there Sparky.

Oh Ok, I’ll be charitable with you. Let’s learn how to read a judge’s ruling. First, the relevant part of the ruling:

https://www.scribd.com/document/337807824/Darweesh-v-Trump

ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from, in any manner or by any means, removing individuals with refugee application approved by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services as part of the U.S. Refugee Admission Program, holders of valid immigrant and non-immigrant visas and other individuals from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen legally authorized to enter the United States.

Now let’s format this f*cker:

ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from, in any manner or by any means, removing individuals

* with refugee application approved by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services as part of the U.S. Refugee Admission Program,

* holders of valid immigrant and non-immigrant visas and

* other individuals from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen legally authorized to enter the United States.

Now let’s visit #19 of this thread with the bum title:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3518697/posts?page=19#19

Heck, let’s forget revisiting it and just repeat the 2nd tweet of that post:

Judge: “Class is pretty well defined as outline in the papers - otherwise would be reviewing stays for a hundred people” so stay is national

This 2nd part of the tweet is a quote of the judge from the courtroom. The STAY IS NATIONAL.

Now go back to the ruling above and it says it applies to enjoin and restrain removal of all those visa holders.

That doesn’t mean only those in the US already. Why?

Well, what does a visa permit a person to do? It permits them to travel to the US.

And when they travel to the US, what does the judge’s ruling say?

It says they cannot be removed.

THEREFORE, all Syrian ‘refugees’ that Obama rushed visa approvals for in his last weeks are possessing a visa to travel to the US. And once they’re here, they cannot be removed according to this effing judge.

Got it now?

Now here’s what might be done because time is of the essence. The President can revoke all the affected visas.

Now, why is time of the essence? Because there can be thousands and thousands heading to the US now and in the weeks ahead.

[Hostage]

Yes. Mentioned in the thread above.

[Hostage]

> “McConnell in surrendering the filibuster in the Senate.”

Wrong again Sparky. McConnell said the President’s nominee to SCOTUS will be confirmed.

The President’s lawyers are going to rain hell down on this judge. The only thing they’re doing now is finalizing their media and messaging plays to hog tie the press while they go forward with the smackdown.

[Political Junkie Too]

We'll see.

And don't call me "Sparky" again if you want to keep a FRiend.

-PJ

[JoeRed]

Wrong. The ruling does not apply to other visa holders, etc who were not detained at the airport because they were already here and were never facing deportation in the first place. It also does not do anything to force the government to allow visa holders on to US bound planes. The ONLY thing it does is prevent those currently held in detention from being deported. You need to learn to read the ruling. It ONLY enjoins and restrains from REMOVING, it does NOT force the government to let them on planes n the first place. It is you adding to the ruling something that isn’t there. They never argued that refusing to allow someone on a plane would cause substantial and irreparable harm, and therefor the judge never ruled on that. And you can call me Joe.

[Hostage]

Tell me some names of some of your school teachers and I will volunteer to write a complaint to them on your behalf.

[JoeRed]

Wow, condescending AND wrong.

[Hostage]

Well, don’t worry, I’ll also volunteer to write a letter on your behalf to anyone in particular about how your parents neglected to instill in you a sense of humor.

Anyways no matter, the news just crossed the wire that the President’s Custom’s Agents are ignoring the judge’s orders. So you can tell the President how wrong he is or something.

Bye Bye Now!

[JoeRed]

Good to hear, but I didn’t even remotely suggest that the president is wrong. I was pointing out the fact that despite the headline “Federal Judge Halts Trump’s Muslim Ban” all the order did was to stop the government from immediately removing a relatively small number of people who are under detention at a few US airports. The ban is still in place. Bye.

[Hostage]

There are people right now flying into many airports of the US and they were able to so because they hold visas.

If any of those persons are affected by the President’s EO, then they will be subject to release by authority of the judge’s stay decision.

The Custom’s Agents are for now defying the judge’s orders.

So it’s not over.

And there will be a continued stream of such people entering the US.

The judge’s decision affects all the visa holders described in the court order. And there is nothing to stop such persons from entering the US unless their visas are revoked.

Again, for now, such persons arriving are being detained.

The point is that this group of persons, this class of persons, in detention or released, can grow in number because they hold visas. That means the President’s EO is ‘leaking’ or may leak, thus rendering it impotent. It is shameful that democrats think that is some sort of victory.

[Pinkbell]

Oh, I know the ruling is real. I’m talking about them calling it a “Muslim Ban” when it’s clearly not as there are 50 majority Muslim countries and many other countries that have Muslim populations, and only 7 majority Muslim countries are banned. A Muslim ban would ban all Muslims.

[Hostage]

Yes, the title is intentionally misleading but the underlying news is not fake.

[Carry me back]

Judges can’t do this. They don’t make policy.

[Hostage]

Yep, but they try and often do.

Here is where I believe this judge fails on the law of jurisdiction cited in the complaint:

28 USC Sec. 2241(e)(1)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3518738/posts?page=48#48

[WildHighlander57]

Thanks for the correction.

I had put the titles below the links, but just copied n pasted the links...

I saw the news that dhs said it was still enforcing the eo

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3518780/posts

[Hostage]

DHS is in defiance of the court decision but it may not matter as the district court appears to not have clear jurisdiction:

28 USC Sec, 2241(e)(1)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3518738/posts?page=48#48

Of course in my view, the judge here does not have jurisdiction but I’m just a spectator watching a third base umpire call a strike on a batter.

But this is much more serious than baseball. This is deadly.

[HollyB]

You see, Trump is keeping his word and only enforced an already approved congressional order.

All the tantrums in the world is not going to change a thing. Have a little faith.

[CodeToad]

It isn't a muslim ban, morons.