Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Appeals Court Denies Justice Dept Motion to Lift Travel Ban Restraining Order [9th Rebuffs Trump]
ABCNews ^ | February 05, 2017

Posted on 02/05/2017 12:58:56 AM PST by Steelfish

Appeals Court Denies Justice Department's Motion to Lift Travel Ban Restraining Order By DEAN SCHABNER DAVID CAPLAN Feb 5, 2017 The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit announced early Sunday morning that it has denied the Department of Justice's emergency motion -- filed late Saturday -- to issue an immediate stay on a Washington State judge's temporary restraining order of President Donald Trump's controversial travel ban.

"The court has received appellants' emergency motion (Docket Entry No. 14)," read the order from the appeals court. "Appellants' request for an immediate administrative stay pending full consideration of the emergency motion for a stay pending appeal is denied."

Lawyers from Washington State and Minnesota, who brought the challenge to court in Seattle, have until Sunday at 11:59 p.m. Pacific Time to file a response to the Department of Justice's request. The Justice Department then has until Monday 3 p.m. Pacific Time to file a reply brief.

Lawyers for the Department of Justice argued in the filing that the restraining order is "vastly overboard," and it "second-guesses" the commander in chief.

(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 9thcircuit; 9thcircus; aliens; bordersecurity; breaking; doj; first100days; lawsuit; refugees; ruling; spartansixdeltatrump; travelban; trump; trump45; trump7countryban; trumpdoj
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 261-269 next last
To: sheikdetailfeather
Thank for the link. Here's what it says.


"Before: CANBY and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judge s.The court has

received appellants’ emergency motion (Docket Entry No. 14).

Appellants’ request for an immediate administrative stay

pending full consideration of the emergency motion

for a stay pending appeal is denied. Appellees’ opposition

to the emergency motion is due Sunday, February 5, 2017

at 11:59 p.m. PST. Appellants’ reply in support of the

emergency motion is due Monday, February 6, 2017 at 3:00

p.m. PST."



As we see, the Emergency Motion has not started before the 9th Prima Donnas. Sometime today they'll get it from the DOJ.

121 posted on 02/05/2017 5:07:15 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: broken_arrow1

Correct. a 4-4 tie upholds the lower court ruling.


122 posted on 02/05/2017 5:10:38 AM PST by cableguymn (We need a redneck in the white house....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Husker24

Start with Boston and Berkeley.


123 posted on 02/05/2017 5:15:07 AM PST by golas1964
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: nralife

Hey, it’s the 9th Circuit. Exactly what I would expect from them. Trump needs to split the 9th into two circuits and appoint more judges to both.


124 posted on 02/05/2017 5:16:39 AM PST by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel and NRA Life Member)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Presbyterian Reporter

i don’t believe the 9th denied the appeal - they denied the immediate stay, i believe. not that DJT has much of a chance to succeed there. wondering if admin preparing a new exec order - but we need to know what courts are objecting to. Wash judge didn’t disclose and we don’t know what 9th will say.


125 posted on 02/05/2017 5:19:51 AM PST by avital2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Pinkbell

They should go nuclear. Hearing Monday vote Tuesday on court Wednesday.


126 posted on 02/05/2017 5:21:29 AM PST by John W (Under Two Months And Counting!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: TigerClaws

I actually think Trump’s best move to replace Ginsburg would be to put up Merrick Garland. I think Obama named Garland for the simple reason he’s viewed as a more moderate judge - as Obama needed the Republicans in the Senate to approve him in his final year. From Obama’s perspective, trading Garland for Scalia was a great trade. For the same reason, trading Garland for Ginsburg would be worthy of much popcorn as the Dems twist themselves in knots to explain why Garland is now unacceptable — especially after squealing for the past year about getting a Senate hearing on him.


127 posted on 02/05/2017 5:22:18 AM PST by USNA74
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: LeoWindhorse

This isn’t much different than activist judges overturning the will of the people. In fact it’s the same thing because the people voted for Trump and his policies.


128 posted on 02/05/2017 5:27:31 AM PST by CottonBall (Thank you, Julian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Reno89519

The question is why the hell Trump didn’t just ignore these rogue judges that are flagrantly breaking the law.


129 posted on 02/05/2017 5:28:30 AM PST by VermithraxPejorative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

9th circuit? Shocking!

Not.


130 posted on 02/05/2017 5:32:15 AM PST by Tanniker Smith (Rome didn't fall in a day, either.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vaden

Guillotines.


131 posted on 02/05/2017 5:34:12 AM PST by CottonBall (Thank you, Julian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Where are the protest outside this courthouse. The right doesn’t ever fight


132 posted on 02/05/2017 5:36:34 AM PST by wiseprince
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ray76

You seem to have forgotten that both houses of Congress are filled with Republicans who agree with the judge’s order in this case.


133 posted on 02/05/2017 5:36:46 AM PST by Alberta's Child ("Yo, bartender -- Jobu needs a refill!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf

What does delegating have to do with keeping his promises to us? CEOs know how to accomplish tasks, not postpone them like politicians.

Once again, Trump is ousting the traitors in this country (judges this time).


134 posted on 02/05/2017 5:39:34 AM PST by CottonBall (Thank you, Julian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Raster
Can’t the Pubs put up a bill and have DJT sign it on Monday?

Don't make me laugh. The congressional Republicans show those kinds of balls and move that fast? It would disturb their Sunday brunches and evening schmooze fests with donors.

We aren't a country anymore. We're run by a collection of vicious Left-wing [blank]s no matter who we vote for, so what the [blank]! Let the jihadists flood in and blow us all to hell and back.

President Trump hasn't got a prayer of succeeding because the whole filthy Marxist apparatus and their street thugs around the world are against him. And those of us who support him are not strong enough to do anything about it.

135 posted on 02/05/2017 5:40:54 AM PST by Avalon Memories (If Dems want to be purveyors of unverifiable sewer trash, we can play the same game.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Use Obama’s favorite trick: a Presidential Memorandum instead of an EO.


136 posted on 02/05/2017 5:42:14 AM PST by homegroan (Liberalism is a CULT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: StAnDeliver

“I could go into detail but I won’t, it’s just not reasonable to expect anyone but a very few FReepers to understand appellate law.”

How sad that the majority of us here are so stupid.

I love being condescended to in the morning. /s


137 posted on 02/05/2017 5:44:23 AM PST by CottonBall (Thank you, Julian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: TigerClaws
Wait a couple of weeks for the confirmation to take place and swearing in.

A couple of weeks? Try April, at best. A month, minimum, and that's if everything goes well.

138 posted on 02/05/2017 5:44:59 AM PST by Avalon Memories (If Dems want to be purveyors of unverifiable sewer trash, we can play the same game.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: StAnDeliver
I could go into detail but I won't, it's just not reasonable to expect anyone but a very few FReepers to understand appellate law.

StAnDeliver, many of us I am sure would be very interested to hear your thoughts. More so if you know something about the legal issues. I get quite frustrated reading through these threads, trying to find a shred of information. Yes, we all know Freepers are disgusted, etc. But all these wild statements to remove judges, or just ignore them, or other wild statements that are not in the slightest in accord with our laws and constitution..... I see that on the 2012 Arizona border enforcement case at the Supreme Court, Kennedy wrote the majority opinion, and stated very strongly that the federal government has the say on immigration. Wikipedia says, "Kennedy's opinion embraced an expansive view of the United States Government's authority to regulate immigration and aliens, describing it as "broad" and "undoubted." " Roberts, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor joined him. Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito each concurred in part and dissented in part in separate opinions joined by no other justice. Yes, it is a different issue, but very recently, federal authority over immigration management was upheld by these justices in a state case. I would be interested to hear from legal beagles here if this would have any meaning for the current situation.

139 posted on 02/05/2017 5:47:19 AM PST by Old_Grouch (69 and AARP-free. Monthly FR contributor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Right-wing Librarian
Can he remove all of them from their positions for not upholding the Constitution?

No. That power is granted to Congress in the Constitution. They can impeach federal judges. But fat chance ever getting Congress to do that.

140 posted on 02/05/2017 5:48:47 AM PST by Avalon Memories (If Dems want to be purveyors of unverifiable sewer trash, we can play the same game.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 261-269 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson