Posted on 02/07/2017 4:49:44 PM PST by Steelfish
Federal Judges Express Skepticism About Trump Travel Ban SUDHIN THANAWALA,
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — A panel of appeals court judges reviewing President Donald Trump's travel ban hammered away Tuesday at the federal government's arguments that the states cannot challenge the order.
The hearing before the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals judges was the greatest legal challenge yet to the ban, which has upended travel to the U.S. for more than a week and tested the new administration's use of executive power.
The government asked the court to restore Trump's order, contending that the president alone has the power to decide who can enter or stay in the United States. But several states have fought the ban on travelers from seven predominantly Muslim nations and insisted that it is unconstitutional.
The judges — two Democratic appointees and one Republican — repeatedly questioned Justice Department lawyer August Flentje on why the states should not be able to sue on behalf of their residents or on behalf of their universities, which have complained about students and faculty getting stranded overseas.
Circuit Judge Michelle T. Friedland, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, asked whether the government has any evidence connecting the seven predominantly Muslim nations covered by the ban to terrorism.
Flentje told the judges that the case was moving fast and the government had not yet included evidence to support the ban.
Friedland asked if the government had connected any immigrants from the seven countries to terrorism.
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
9 Circus will likely rule against Trump.
Case is headed to the SCOTUS.
Who gives a damn, it’s a preventative measure and it’s CONSTITUTIONALLY FALLS ON THE PRESIDENT, NOT A JUDGE.
We listened to the whole thing and we could not really tell how they will rule on this matter.
Pretty much this.
The Obama judge is going against Trump, the Bush judge against Washington.
It’s going to be 2-1 either way, with the Carter-appointed judge casting the deciding vote.
Regardless, it’s going to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Nutty Ninth ain’t getting the final say on this.
Absurd on its face as they (the Federal courts) have repeatedly insisted that immigration is the sole responsibility of the Federal government...meaning laws passed by the Congress and implemented by the Executive.
THE LAW IS AS PLAIN AS IT CAN BE, YOU BLACK ROBED IDIOT CLOWN UNELECTED TYRANTS.
DO YOUR JOBS OR RESIGN!
“Nobody will ever convince me that 99.999% of American lawyers are filthy,worthless psychopaths.”
You might be a little low on your %!
I was stunned at the incompetence of the Justice Department lawyer. He was barely coherent. I could have done better by just listening to Laura Ingraham and Judge Neapolitano, and I am not a lawyer. He only needed to hit about five points while quoting the law.
They're California Maoists.The law doesn't matter to them...only "social justice".
I heard on Hannity that the 9th Circuit is the most overruled in the country, with 80% of cases overturned. May be wrong on that number.
a set up from the start .l
9th circus is joke .
the dems and they’re media went to,there favorite radical court .
trump need to have state dep,stop all visas and stop all refuge program payments .
make them dept orders .
put the brake on .
That is, 80% of those that are appealed to the SC.
Obama holdovers
It’s a rather straight forward issue.
The 9th either smacks down Robart, or the Supreme Court will 8-0.
Could this be a case of the DOJ throwing the case on purpose, before Jeff Sessions gets appointed and can start to purge the Obama agents throughout the DOJ?
90% with a 9 person Supreme Court.
No way this country will survive if the tyranny of the unconstitutional made up ‘Federal’ courts is not ended.
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.