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

Skip to comments.

Trump administration won’t appeal ruling against immigration order to the Supreme Court
Washington Post ^ | 10 Feb 17 | Washington Post Staff

Posted on 02/10/2017 3:13:46 PM PST by SkyPilot

The Trump administration can wage a legal battle in the lower courts to address more squarely whether the president's immigration directive violates the Constitution. The White House is also mulling whether to rewrite the executive order. No matter what, the administration faces a difficult fight to restore the ban.

This is a developing story. It will be updated.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 9thcircuit; aliens; bordersecurity; courts; first100days; illegals; travelban; trump; trump45; trump7countryban
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-110 next last
To: dhs12345

Sadly, that true.


41 posted on 02/10/2017 3:28:54 PM PST by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
FAKE NEWS excuse #4: "Say it's a 'developing story'! Yeah, that's the ticket..."

Ashley Parker ‏@AshleyRParker · 12m12 minutes ago
"Every single court option is on the table, including an appeal of the Ninth Circuit decision on the TRO to the Supreme Court." — Reince

42 posted on 02/10/2017 3:29:28 PM PST by mrsmith (Dumb sluts: Lifeblood of the Media, Backbone of the Democrat/RINO Party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Truth29
I just heard that too; supposedly one of the other judges in the 9th Circuit has asked that the circuit consider if there should be an en banc rehearing of the 3 judge panel decision and has asked both sides to submit briefs on this issue.

Why would the 9th Circus ask for that?

43 posted on 02/10/2017 3:29:37 PM PST by SkyPilot ("I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: scooby321

Oops, the quote was from another thread, not you, but the description of an additional judge making the request was current.


44 posted on 02/10/2017 3:29:40 PM PST by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

The right call. The order was not the greatest, he should’ve put more of his team into place first. Don’t want to go to SCOTUS with a bad decision that needs to be overturned, and then end up with a 4-4 decision letting it stand. If anybody who would’ve been stopped by this order commits a terrorist act, blood will be on their hands, not Trump’s.


45 posted on 02/10/2017 3:29:49 PM PST by Behind the Blue Wall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Nope.....fake news. All kind of stuff breaking.


46 posted on 02/10/2017 3:30:00 PM PST by wardamneagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LouisianaJoanof Arc

Havent read it. do you mean en banc?? All judges


47 posted on 02/10/2017 3:30:15 PM PST by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: scooby321
Interesting. Trump told reporters on AF One he would win eventually in court, but is implementing "other options."

Also, this from the Twitter site you linked:


48 posted on 02/10/2017 3:31:45 PM PST by SkyPilot ("I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Mr. Trump has publicly stated many times that he never backs down from a fight when he thinks he’s in the right, so it will be very interesting to see what comes next.


49 posted on 02/10/2017 3:31:46 PM PST by ichabod1 (The Wise Cracker)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

I’ve asked this before, but no answer: If Trump rescinds the first EO and issues another more in line with the Ninth Circuit, doesn’t he by doing so leave the rulings of the court as precedent?

This would be absolutely unacceptable.


50 posted on 02/10/2017 3:31:55 PM PST by Chaguito
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Williams

Good call. Wait for Gorsuch, but even then, the rogue Kennedy may still cause a problem.


51 posted on 02/10/2017 3:32:42 PM PST by LS ("Castles Made of Sand, Fall in the 4Sea . . . Eventually" (Hendrix))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Truth29

See post #48.


52 posted on 02/10/2017 3:33:21 PM PST by SkyPilot ("I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
"Why would the 9th Circus ask for that?"

Don't know, but maybe to give the 9th another bite at the apple to strengthen their decision. I can't believe it would be for any reason to help the Administration or further justice.

53 posted on 02/10/2017 3:33:28 PM PST by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: euram

Cuz it will still be appealed to the USSC eventually.


54 posted on 02/10/2017 3:33:54 PM PST by LS ("Castles Made of Sand, Fall in the 4Sea . . . Eventually" (Hendrix))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
ban all/all refugees from all countries, allow green cards only after re-vetting....
55 posted on 02/10/2017 3:36:00 PM PST by B212
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: scooby321

There and possibly legal action in other court circuits and likely new EOs next week. Trump going to challenge this usurpation for 8 years if it has to takes that long. Start changing the courts to Constitutional following judges. 100 plus opening right now.


56 posted on 02/10/2017 3:36:25 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sasparilla

And WI, PA and MI....courtesy of one Kelly Anne Conway.


57 posted on 02/10/2017 3:36:49 PM PST by ripnbang ("An armed man is a citizen, an unarmed man, a subject.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: LouisianaJoanof Arc

In law, an en banc session (French for “in bench”) is a session in which a case is heard before all the judges of a court (before the entire bench) rather than by a panel of judges selected from them.
The travel ban was heard by three judges, en banc rules for the 9th circuit would mean a minimum of 11 judges and a maximum of twenty-five judges would rule on the lawsuit.


58 posted on 02/10/2017 3:38:26 PM PST by Nero Germanicus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Truth29

En banc is limited in the 9th Circus court because of so many judges. IIRC.....11 judges. Not sure if it is different there when a judge asks for it.


59 posted on 02/10/2017 3:38:31 PM PST by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Good. Later. Reissue the order reworded. Alan Dersowich said to redo the order.


60 posted on 02/10/2017 3:42:04 PM PST by Hattie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-110 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