Posted on 02/07/2017 4:49:44 PM PST by Steelfish
The thing about lawyers is that what is true or what is right is the last thing on their minds. Their primary concern is how to win the argument/case. It may be that suppressing or misrepresenting the truth is the best means to that end. If so, then that is what they’ll do.
Their clients will thank them. For the rest of us, it pretty much stinks.
This is a case of Trump not understanding the enemy, or the nature of the battlefield.
This case will move forward to the SCOTUS for ruling. SCOTUS will support POTUS Trump for obvious reasons!!!
“”Friedland asked if the government had connected any immigrants from the seven countries to terrorism.””
How many does he want? One, two, five, ten or 100? I’m sure he’s convinced himself that they are all good family men and have only the desire to have peace and good will in the world among all people, secure a good life for their families blah blah blah. Our security shouldn’t be at the whim of what or whether or not foreign workers are allowed back into the country to work..
From what I could hear on FOX at 6 pm, the government lawyer had to be one of the weakest they could find in the DOJ. They haven’t had time to put in place any new ones and won’t until Senator Sessions is confirmed so who did they get?
I can’t remember where I heard the number and countries read off today but terrorist acts here in our country were named - states/number of terrorists and countries of origin. I watched so much, I only recall Somalia at this point... Is this what is supposed to be happening? Get us so confused we don’t even know our own names or do we have to sit and take notes?
Both sides were slapped with hard questions and interruptions. On balance, neither side had an advantage. The states got on a mandamus tangent which was quickly attacked by the Court. Standing was a big issue. Also, one judge pointed out that it appeared that all Moslems weren’t targeted by the EO. Also how could those with no direct connections with the USA have rights here? One judge questioned that.
Just on its face, it’s a toss up.
Trump wins EITHER WAY - America not necessarily. If the courts uphold the ban, then Trump gets to keep the animals outside our borders. If the courts decide to play Executive, then Trump is INNOCULATED against any terror attack that can be remotely related to his ban being overturned and ALL of the blame lies with Democrats and Judges.
Rough on Americans to have to go through another attack, but Trump wins and wins big...which, I guess, means that America does win out in the end, also.
They are not even ruling on the Constitution on the order
You had us going there for a second.....a split second...
It seems to me that this is all Trump’s lawyers need to present:
Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate immigration. In 1952, Congress passed a law empowering the president to deny entry into the U.S. to “any class of aliens” considered to be “detrimental to the interests of the United States.”
“”from seven predominantly Muslim nations””
As another article a few days ago read - that’s because they’ve killed off everyone else in the country!! Including other muslims!
If this is how the courts are going to conduct themselves, then it’s time they be dismantled entirely.
What’s the ability of the states to sue got to do with allowing the EO to stand? As long as it’s being held up by the courts no one is being denied entry so there’s nothing to sue about.
You don’t want it at SCOTUS with only 8 judges, typically a 4-4 tie, with quirky Kennedy possibly making it 5-3 against Trump. It would just be nice if occasionally judges put the law before their political biases.
“”stop all refuge program payments””
YES YES YES - We’ll get the word out yet and people will HAVE to get the point - there’s gold in them thar’ hills!
Exactly....having utter disinterest in what is "true" and "right" is the definition of a psychopath.
IMO.
Dear Judge:
A) Let them move into YOUR neighborhood.
B) Let yourself be personally liable for any damages.
2) Or to think outside the box, does Trump not have an Executive right to ban from any countries he chooses? How about a blanket ban against numerous countries, starting with the 7 in the current order, adding China, Nigeria, and just to piss off Merkel, throw Germany in there. Just make it as randomn as possible.
That’s a very good point. I wonder if the law attracts psychopaths, or creates them.
“”This case will move forward to the SCOTUS for ruling. “”
I’ve been trying to figure out how that would work. Would they take it and make a ruling with all their other decisions in June when they are ready to recess OR would a decision be made now when it counts?
OR would one justice hear the case now - the one assigned to where? Like they do in last minute appeal death penalty cases! State of WA or State of MI? I guess according to FOX there are 43 other states joining in now...It COULD take until June, I guess.
Does anyone know?
Yup....the Army taught me to type many,many years ago.I guess it shows! ;-)
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.