Skip to comments.
Byron York: Justice Department demolishes case against Trump order
Washington Examiner ^
| February 5, 2017
| Byron York
Posted on 02/05/2017 8:11:52 PM PST by bobsunshine
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-83 next last
Good Article - has all the main points in the DOJ Brief
To: bobsunshine
Has the government presented their case already? I thought Monday was their day.
2
posted on
02/05/2017 8:15:35 PM PST
by
HotHunt
To: bobsunshine
Impeach this so-called judge, and abolish the 9th circuit while we’re at it.
Obama’s only enduring legacy seems to be that America has forgotten what the rule of law is. Our government is now filled with people who think they can pick and choose which laws to obey and enforce, or just make up new ones as they go along.
3
posted on
02/05/2017 8:16:40 PM PST
by
Junk Silver
(I have four words for Bill and Hillary Clinton to ponder: "Attorney General Jeff Sessions".)
To: bobsunshine
Was the Ninth Curcuit envanc when they upheld the judge’s ruling?
4
posted on
02/05/2017 8:17:24 PM PST
by
Nifster
(I see puppy dogs in the clouds)
To: Nifster
5
posted on
02/05/2017 8:18:48 PM PST
by
scooby321
(o even lower)
To: Nifster
No. They were in San Francisco
To: bobsunshine
Robard...treason. Prison.
7
posted on
02/05/2017 8:19:58 PM PST
by
MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
(Freedom is the freedom to discipline yourself so others don't have to do it for you.)
To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
Indeed, as the Ninth Circuit (which includes Seattle) has held, that statute specifically grants the President, where it is in the national interest to do so, the extreme power to prevent the entry of any alien or groups of aliens into this country as well as the lesser power to grant entry to such person or persons WITH ANY RESTRICTION on their entry as he may deem to be appropriate. [emphasis added]
8
posted on
02/05/2017 8:20:51 PM PST
by
scooby321
(o even lower)
To: MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
Didn’t a Boston court void the stay?
9
posted on
02/05/2017 8:22:26 PM PST
by
fella
("As it was before Noah so shall it be again,")
To: bobsunshine
This is good stuff. Unfortunately, I have shaky faith in the federal bench.
There is just something about The Donald that makes some people lose their freakin' minds and forget their social graces, lose their sense of fair play, and betray even their oaths of office. I can't explain it-- but I do observe it.
10
posted on
02/05/2017 8:23:33 PM PST
by
Lysandru
To: bobsunshine
11
posted on
02/05/2017 8:23:57 PM PST
by
Guenevere
(If my people......will humble themselves and pray and seek my face .....I will heal their land...)
To: bobsunshine
We do not want military coups in this nation and we sure as hell do not want judicial coups. This “judge” needs to be removed.
To: bobsunshine
The Brady comeback was a sign ... This is going to hurt the left when it gets over turned
13
posted on
02/05/2017 8:27:17 PM PST
by
11th_VA
(Resistance is Futile !!!!)
To: Junk Silver
I agree completely; any judge who oversteps his authority like this should be removed from office.
14
posted on
02/05/2017 8:27:33 PM PST
by
budj
(beam me up, scotty...)
To: HotHunt
The were apparently arguments last week. The Judge chose to go with his emotions late Friday.
15
posted on
02/05/2017 8:30:09 PM PST
by
Paladin2
(No spellcheck. It's too much work to undo the auto wrong word substitution on mobile devices.)
To: fella
They did not ‘re-up it,it lapsed.
16
posted on
02/05/2017 8:31:14 PM PST
by
samantha
(keep up the fight..)
To: budj
DjT is once again correct based on the arguments and the law:
this "so-called" judge
17
posted on
02/05/2017 8:39:46 PM PST
by
chiller
(One from the Right - One for the Fight)
To: budj
any judge who oversteps his authority like this should be removed from office. Probably many more to follow. I want them cleaning sewers.
18
posted on
02/05/2017 8:40:06 PM PST
by
ROCKLOBSTER
(The fear of stark justice sends hot urine down their thighs.)
To: bobsunshine
The legal argument is solid. But, this will be heard by the ultra liberal bat crazy 9th Circuit court. And when it moves on to SCOTUS, a 4/4 tie lets a wrong appeals court ruling stand.
19
posted on
02/05/2017 8:42:08 PM PST
by
Sasparilla
( I'm Not tired of Winning)
To: Nifster
No, only two. I thought you needed three, but it wouldn’t surprise me at all that en banc would be needed to see the law fairly applied.
20
posted on
02/05/2017 8:43:54 PM PST
by
USNBandit
(Sarcasm engaged at all times)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-83 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson