Posted on 03/01/2017 12:14:50 PM PST by jazusamo
When you start by accepting the initial lie, they’ve got you. It’s NOT a “travel ban”.
It is a PROTECTION FROM INVASION (illegal immigration and enemy immigration is “invasion”).
I read it but maybe I am stupid or mentally allergic to legal mumbo jumbo; it sounded like the law firm which did work for Trump couldn’t do work in this regard; so how does that jibe with the misleading article title?
It was actually a ‘pause’ but the Rats and media made it a ‘ban’.
It’s not a “travel” anything. It is an immigration act. They can “travel” all the want but they can’t come into the U.S.
“Travel ban” is yet another lying mislabel by the Chronic Lying Leftist Media.
I’m no legal eagle either but it looks to me like a lawyer of the Jones Day firm filed an amicus brief supporting the suit and Trump had been a client of that firm which would be unethical.
Your case is only as good as the lawyer you have.
Gotta defend a friend here. I play hockey with Augie, and he is a damn fine fellow. Sounds to me like he was put in a bad situation, but what do I know.
any Trump people doing business with this guy should take their business elsewhere.
Rather than speculating, give this information to the state bar ethics committee and let them deal with it.
He certainly didn’t SEEM competent.
I mean the language could not be clearer.
Yep, and I have a lot of respect for von Spokovsky.
He wouldn’t be speaking out if there is nothing there.
That EO was going to fail on the basis of of excluding those who had a legal right to be in the United States and also forgot to address those who have been helpful to United States interests and the work they performed.
This one should be clean and fix those issues.
So basically, the lawyer that filed the amicus brief that the EO was unconstitutional, violated that long standing understanding that is standard across states for all law firms in the nation.
At oral argument, the government was represented by career lawyer August Flentje. As Paul Mirengoff at Powerline says, Flentje “did not argue effectively” -- an understatement, according to my sources.
But why was Flentje arguing the case in the first place instead of Acting Solicitor General Noel Francisco, an exceptional lawyer who has argued numerous cases before the U.S. Supreme Court and who filed an outstanding brief in the case?
Because on the day before oral argument, Francisco recused himself from the case.
When will TRUMP FIRE all Obama a]ointees?
IF those lawyers are highly ethical how many have filed a complaint to have Him disbarred?
IF those lawyers are highly ethical how many have filed a complaint to have him disbarred?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.