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

Skip to comments.

Trump's revised travel ban dealt first court setback
Reuters ^ | Mar 10, 2017 | Mica Rosenberg in New York and Sharon Bernstein in Sacramento, California; Editing by Sandra Maler)

Posted on 03/10/2017 6:41:16 PM PST by mdittmar

Edited on 03/11/2017 7:28:05 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator. [history]

See link.


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aliens; muslims; terrorism; terrorists
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-99 next last
To: combat_boots

Wow, what is this from?


61 posted on 03/10/2017 8:51:47 PM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

Headline, authors, and content do not match at all with article you’ve linked.


62 posted on 03/10/2017 8:53:43 PM PST by Enchante (Libtards are enemies of true civilization!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle

Reddit


63 posted on 03/10/2017 9:03:35 PM PST by combat_boots (God bless Israel and all who protect and defend her! And please, God, bless the USA again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: ShorelineMike

Thanks for the info Mike. Glad it wasn’t as bad as it looked. —I thought there almost had to be two rulings but didn’t think they’d bury one article under another, I don’t know why though...


64 posted on 03/10/2017 9:17:32 PM PST by Cats1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

Wow, maybe these eggheads are starting to get the message.


65 posted on 03/10/2017 9:19:56 PM PST by Excuse_My_Bellicosity (Liberalism is a social disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
B A N!!!
66 posted on 03/10/2017 9:30:53 PM PST by luvie (Be still and know that I Am GOD.....Psalm 46:10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: combat_boots

Wow. That’s a powerful statement. I wish more people would write letters of support!

Of course, they might and we just don’t hear about them.


67 posted on 03/10/2017 9:38:18 PM PST by luvie (Be still and know that I Am GOD.....Psalm 46:10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar
If we had enough conservatives in the House who believed in the Constitution, a whole lot of black-robed tyrants would be impeached.

If we had enough conservatives in the Senate to convict, a whole lot of black-robed tyrants would be imprisoned.
68 posted on 03/10/2017 9:42:17 PM PST by Montana_Sam (Truth lives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

The article says the court ruled against the new regulation. The plaintiff’s suit was upheld.


69 posted on 03/10/2017 9:47:01 PM PST by arrogantsob (Check out "CHAOS AND MAYHEM" at Amazon.com.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hotlanta Mike

“The handwriting was if this judge issued a halt to the newest EO be would be facing impeachment and removal...”
Why do people talk like this? There is ZERO chance of impeachment no matter what any judge rules. None.

This regulation has been stayed and the plaintiff prevailed in his suit.


70 posted on 03/10/2017 9:53:04 PM PST by arrogantsob (Check out "CHAOS AND MAYHEM" at Amazon.com.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: 4Runner

You are wrong. Any constitutional question can legitimately go before a court.

Nor does the executive have any authority to forbid the courts purview of the new regulation.

There is an argument that the Congress can, under the “Exceptions” clause in the constitution, place certain laws outside review. But I don’t know if that has ever been done.


71 posted on 03/10/2017 10:09:22 PM PST by arrogantsob (Check out "CHAOS AND MAYHEM" at Amazon.com.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: RoseofTexas; All

“I’m reading it as the judge slammed down the new ban...am I correct?” You are correct. The judge in Washington did not rule but the one in Wisconsin upheld the plaitiff’s suit.

I don’t know what people are reading to see a victory here.


72 posted on 03/10/2017 10:12:57 PM PST by arrogantsob (Check out "CHAOS AND MAYHEM" at Amazon.com.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: nralife

Different court.


73 posted on 03/10/2017 10:45:35 PM PST by gogeo (When your life is based on a false premise...you are indeed insane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

Good. Now I won’t have to see Washington State’s attorney general on TV any more. He is such TV hog.


74 posted on 03/10/2017 11:25:50 PM PST by taxesareforever (Islam is an ideology. It is NOT a religion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stopthethreat

Good one


75 posted on 03/10/2017 11:35:26 PM PST by RightGeek (FUBO and the donkey you rode in on)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot

Just look at them. I would hate to be a liberal. Wake up every morning full of hatred and anger.


76 posted on 03/10/2017 11:37:57 PM PST by matt04
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

The title of this thread needs to be taken out back and shot.


77 posted on 03/11/2017 12:16:45 AM PST by guido911 (all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

I’m not a lawyer, but from what I understand is the fed courts have very limited authority with the new travel ban, since Trump just ordered the embassies to stop issuing visas, and the courts have no say in embassy orders.


78 posted on 03/11/2017 2:17:32 AM PST by Rufus Shinra (Trump is the last best hope for our country. Independence vs. Globalism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: arrogantsob; mdittmar
Here is why there is confusion among folks (including myself) as to whether this is a defeat or a victory.

Read the intro to the thread, and then read the intro to the story.

They are 180 degrees out of phase:

Thread:

A U.S. federal court on Friday refused to put an emergency halt to Republican President Donald Trump's revised travel ban, saying lawyers from states opposed to the measure needed to file more extensive court papers.

------------------------------------------------------------------

Story

A federal judge in Wisconsin dealt the first legal blow to President Donald Trump's revised travel ban on Friday, barring enforcement of the policy to deny U.S. entry to the wife and child of a Syrian refugee already granted asylum in the United States.

Either Reuters changed the story, or it was posted wrong.

79 posted on 03/11/2017 3:48:19 AM 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 72 | View Replies]

To: nralife; arrogantsob; mdittmar; guido911; gogeo
Either there are two different court rulings, or there is massive confusion as to what this ruling says:

Look at this BBC article:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39241321

The ruling came from Seattle district judge James Robart, the same judge who had issued the order that in effect halted implementation of the first ban. Judge Robart said lawyers needed to file more extensive documentation. The new 90-day ban on citizens of six mostly Muslim nations is due to come into effect on Thursday but has sparked legal action in a number of states. Lawyers in Washington state had asked Judge Robart to extend his decision on the first ban to cover the second.The ruling came from Seattle district judge James Robart, the same judge who had issued the order that in effect halted implementation of the first ban. Judge Robart said lawyers needed to file more extensive documentation. But the judge cited procedural reasons for not doing so. He said a complaint or a motion would have to be filed before he could rule.

80 posted on 03/11/2017 3:58:39 AM 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 79 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-99 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