Posted on 02/06/2017 2:04:53 PM PST by Innovative
WASHINGTON — The Latest on the lawsuit involving President Donald Trump’s executive order restraining immigration (all times local): 4:35 p.m. White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer says the Trump administration is not rethinking its strategy over the president’s ban on refugees and travelers from seven predominantly Muslim countries from entering the United States.
He says the administration remains confident it will prevail in the lawsuit.
Spicer tells reporters traveling aboard Air Force One the president has “huge discretion” to protect the safety of Americans. He says “clearly the law is on the president’s side, the Constitution’s on the president’s side.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
That is if the law is governing. If it is pure politics, then the 9th Circuit will rule against the Administration because the law has become what a Lefty judge says when they say it.
“seven predominantly Muslim countries”
Purposely misleading
Should read
SEVEN PREDOMINATLY HIGH RISK TERRORIST COUNTRIES
A lot of people still assume the Left wants to play some sort of ball but their actions have shown me they’ve pulled the pin on their party and intend nothing but destruction from here on in.
Sessions probably advised them of all he’d be investigating, they asked zero to beg for a deal while on Branson’s isle, Bannon said absolutely no deal, and the RATS are waiting for the right timing to pop the cyanide out of their molars.
This doesn’t look like a party that intends to rehabilitate itself to me.
If the answer is "yes",one would think that DJT has the Constitutional authority to do so.
Two things happen when libtards fight everything, _everything_, tooth and nail.
1) they look kookier and more deranged every day
2) they lose more 2018 senate and house seats
They honestly don’t know how foolish they look because they do not hear any voice unless it echoes their preexisting worldview. Not even any voices from any of the 31 states that rejected them.
Keep on fighting libtards. You’ll just lose tired ;)
Those idiots will rule against the President just for the laugh.
No, I can tell you that their reaction to most opposition and failure is to insist for more Left wing policies.
They are truly delusional and six straight years of national a$$ beatings in election after election didn’t give them a clue.
They just followed Bamster down the path right over the cliff. He wouldn’t compromise on his Leftism and they went airborne with him into the abyss.
How do you pull back when you are descending into the abyss?
I have not a solitary idea as to how.
I recognize that there is a well justified pessimism about the likely ruling on this case by the 9th Circuit Court. But I'm predicting that they will rule in Trump's favor with perhaps some minor face saving restriction.
My reasoning is pretty simple: Ruling in favor of the District Court decision and the possibility of 4-4 Supreme Court would result in the 9th Circuit and the District Court decision becoming the "Law of the Land". A terrible precedent. It would allow any wacko Governor or perhaps any citizen to overrule a decision by the President of the United States involving a matter National Security.
I don't think the judges on the 9th Circuit Court want that decision hanging around their neck despite their natural inclination to do do. Too much downside risk. Way too much.
The EO does not say “muslim” but Trump’s intent was made clear during the campaign. During the campaign he said he wanted to exclude muslims from coming into this country. He later backtracked and changed it to specific countries.
So the whole world knows the real intent of this EO. However legal rulings should be based on the specific language in the EO and not campaign rhetoric. But I think what is happening here is that the leftist judges know Trump’s original intent and are using it as an opportunity to attack his EO.
My reasoning is pretty simple: Ruling in favor of the District Court decision and the possibility of 4-4 Supreme Court would result in the 9th Circuit and the District Court decision becoming the “Law of the Land”. A terrible precedent.
***
Legal types should jump in a confirm this, but I’m pretty sure no tied decision by the Supremes can ever be taken as precedent. It would let stand whatever was decided by the lower court, but can not be used as a precedent to decide any future cases.
Is it also true that the head of the DOJ currently is an Obama holdover?
If so, until Sessions is voted into office and the DOJ drained, we will have to put up with the obstructions by DEMs in high places.
Happened all the time. There is a document PDF I looked at that lists them... bammy did it about 25 times in 8 years, the most ever. The doc looked back to Reagan. here is the most recent prior to Trump:
2016, Apr. 21 – Obama Executive Order 13726, 81 Fed. Reg. 23559 Suspending the entry into the United States, as immigrants or nonimmigrants, of aliens who are determined to have “contributed to the situation in Libya” in specified ways (e.g., engaging in “actions or policies that threaten the peace, security, or stability” of that country or may lead to or result in the...
It is based on existing law rather than fee-wings.
It is based on existing law rather than fee-wings.
You could be right about that. But temporarily it would function the same and the lawsuits and the immigrants would fly.
But, precedent or not, the 9th Circuit Court judges will be looking at the likely reaction by their fellow lawyers to a clearly illegal usurpation of Presidential authority by the plaintiffs. Fear of being laughed at is a powerful force.
But the smart money is without a doubt betting I'm wrong. We should have a hint of the ruling when we see the decision on the request for a stay. That should come fairly quickly I would assume.
Soooooooo can I ask why we don’t just steam roll ahead, and declare that the judge’s opinion isn’t welcome and the ruling legal authority has spoken. Any further effort to impede federal efforts to safeguard the nation will be met with legal force.
This was a huge mistake. Trump has basically emboldened the left, and allowed their tactic to work. Undoing this is going to be a problem.
In essence, we just gave every Fed Judge some sort of right to declare whatever law they disagree with invalid? Someone help me out here, what am I missing?
Much is made of the fact that Judge James L. Robard was nominated to the bench by George W. Bush.
A couple of caveats - this was a prank pulled by Sen. Patty Murray, D-Washington. Robard was nominally a “Republican”, albeit of the very progressive nature. Senators often suggest to Presidents certain people in their districts who may make “good” judges, and recalling that Dubya never met a suggestion from “the other side of the aisle” that he couldn’t agree with, all through his first term of office (couldn’t even issue a veto, even on the worst of legislation that crossed his desk), this sounded altogether “reasonable”. Republicans in the Senate, noting that the candidate for the judgeship was nominally a “Republican”, raised not a peep, and the Democrats, all of whom were in on the joke, proceeded to make the confirmation unanimous.
Now to this business of “death threats” that Judge Robards has received since he was put on the bench, the implication is that some mysterious bunch of “conservatives “ are behind the threats. But ANY judge who has been on the bench for any length of time, and has sentenced those convicted of serious crimes to hard time or steep fines, gets these “death threats” on occasion, most of which are meaningless, from either the convict or associates of the convict. Those connected with drug cartels really mean it, of course, and nobody ever said it was easy facing this kind of pressure. Criminal behavior in any venue, but persons of “conservative” demeanor seldom stoop to bare-knuckle threats.
I think all recetn history and evidence demonstrates they will absolutely relish it.
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.