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 ...
Mistake? You sure are putting a lot of thoughts, motivations, and intentions into President Trump's head.
If he backtracked, as you claim, why did he institute a travel ban at all? According to you, he wanted to ban all Muslims from traveling to the U.S. What good will it do to stop travel from just 7 out of 57 Muslim countries? How about Muslims who want to come to the U.S. from those Islamic countries not on the list, or even those who might come in from non-Islamic countries?
From your point of view, the President has made a complete mess of his alleged Muslim ban, because he backtracked after realizing his aim was too broad, but because it's now so narrow, it's an even bigger mistake.
Well, which is it?
And you still haven't answered my question: Did the President institute a Muslim ban?
No, like all brain addled libs, he just couldn't extrapolate far enough ahead, to see that he could potentially bring ruinous and lasting harm to his side.
Remember that they don't operate on logic and reason, but pure emotion.
I explained it earlier but happy to explain it again for you.
Trump backtracked from his campaign statements to temporarily ban all muslims from entering the US and changed it to banning travel from seven countries (the current EO). The leftists know his original intent and regardless of what the EO says they will demagogue it to death. The leftist judges will rule not based on the EO wording or any rationality but use his earlier statements on the campaign trail as justification in their mind to oppose him.
The only solution now is get the new SC justice in place and get a correct ruling on the EO. Right now the 9th will rule against him and the 4-4 Supremes will not be able to overule the 9th.
I getcha.
No matter how inartful Trump's original statement about temporarily banning travel from Muslim countries was, the left was going to oppose him on this, no matter what. Even in the face of bloody Islamic terror attacks - such is their devotion to their quasi religious liberal views.
As you said, there's no winning this through the courts, as currently constituted, which is why I knew it was a strategic error for him to take it in this direction in the first place.
The President has statute law, historical precedent, and the Constitution on his side. He didn't need to do anything but send a strongly worded message to this judge through the DOJ, that the restraining order was illegal, and that it would be ignored.
Instead, he's now made the office of President subservient to a lowly federal judge.
I could scream.
Why scream? The Left has fallen for every other trap DJT has set for them.
Right. Actually they will try to oppose him on everything no matter what but what may be different here is Trump's original intent to "ban muslims" helps these judges feel sanctimonious and further justified in their minds in opposing a lawful EO. Banning muslims works for me but it would never pass legal muster and Trump ran as a law and order President. He could do a 'Jackson' and thumb his nose but why play that card so early?
Trump needs to get the SC justice installed and prevail in the SC ... or implement extreme vetting immediately which negates need for the ban ... or (as another Freeper suggested) just temporarily ban all immigration coming from all countries. Heck no discrimination there. Just shut it down. I sort of like the last option myself. Double down.
In fact, it does pass legal muster.
I think it's US Code 8 (I forget the section number) that gives the President the blanket authority to prohibit entry of any class or type of aliens, if he feels it is in the national interest to do so.
The power of the President under that law is broad, sweeping, and absolute.
Doesn’t matter ... in the real world we live in now ... you won’t get the Supreme Court to go along with banning people into this country based on their religious faith. That would never fly which is why Trump changed it to specific countries. Heck — it is hard enough to ban immigrants from a country in this current climate much less adopt a religious test on immigrants.
Interesting that the MSM continually refers to the 7 “predominantly Muslim” countries, rather than the 7 “most active terrorist breeding” countries.
It's not up to the Supreme Court. It's up to the President, whose authority to ban the entry of ANY class of people, for ANY reason, is solidly backed and protected by statute law, historical precedent, and the Constitution.
If the President STILL needs the permission of the courts - even with all that ironclad authority already welded into the system, then we don't actually have an executive branch, and we certainly don't have laws.
You can take that up with Trump who is allowing a local judge to stay his EO.
Is there an echo in here? I've been screaming that for days!
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.