Posted on 02/05/2017 3:21:31 AM PST by SMGFan
WASHINGTON, Feb 5 (Reuters) - A U.S. appeal court late on Saturday denied a request from the U.S. Department of Justice to immediately restore a immigration order from President Donald Trump barring citizens from seven mainly Muslim countries and temporarily banning refugees.
The court ruling dealt a further setback to Trump, who has denounced the judge in the state of Washington who blocked his Jan. 27 order on Friday. In tweets and comments to reporters, the president has insisted he will get the ban reinstated.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Sessions must follow DeVos,
but first, somebody must lite a fire under McConnell.
Just part of the Progressive Cabal's effort to create a constitutional crisis to weaken or depose Trump. Alinsky's rules are alive and well. Fight Trump in the courts, legislatures, and in the streets. We do live in interesting times.
Now we vote a feller in to finally begin enforcing the law/issuing EO’s to protect our families and way of life and everyone FREAKS OUT. Congress and past presidents both republican/democrat have led us down a path that normalized all the lawlessness.
I don’t think the liberals understand they are painting themselves into a corner here. Winning their case means the moment a refugee attacks, the blood is on their hands and Trump will actually say that. If they lose, Trump’s actions are validated. Of course I don’t hope for an attack at all no matter what, but the sheer numbers don’t give me confidence that something serious won’t occur, especially when you see how Europe has dealt w this.
Maybe Sessions replacement takes months in that state?
You have just described the greatest act of terrorism of all.
That’s really the end game of sheer numbers - to outbreed Americans who love their country.
Would it be fair, therefore, to say that the Judge in Washington has declared USCode 102.18 (ref?) is “unconstitutional”?
If so, has he over stepped his APPELLATE authority (Marbury v. Madison) in making this determination?
IOW, his “opinion” is not enforceable?
I concur: freeze payments to organizations brining them in. Frankly, as of 8am Monday, its time to start melting the the phone lines in DC...in lieu of taking more direct actions...like the kinds you’re thinking about
My feeling is that we are fighting mainly over symbolism here. We’ve had poorly vetted immigrants coming in for years. Delaying the “ban”, which only applies to a few Muslim countries, isn’t going to make a practical difference in terms of the terrorism risk. One way or another Trump is going to win here, because he’s well within his rights to do what he’s doing. Everyone knows this, including non-crazy leftists. It just may not be as quick as we’d like. Trump and Bannon are planting a flag — establishing the notion that it is good and proper for the country to have firm control over who comes here — and that will happen whether the ban goes into effect now or a month or two from now.
Trump asked the same question.
If this were British Parliament and you could hear me, I would be hollering and applauding loudly however they do in debates. Well said and thank you for the information.
I agree 100%, less if there is classified and credible information we don’t know about related to ISIS activity with refugee flows. I could see ISIS believe Trump is going to close the gates; so they move in before he gets a chance to. Trump may have been told this on day one by his natl security team. They may have captured 5 people in the first so many days of his admin, no one knows those facts and generally they wouldn’t share it bc it causes fear and alarm within the populace.
In politics it is often best to create scenarios where the opponent’s position is painfully obvious so they can’t muddy the water and appear moderate when they are not. Making the left protest and call for open immigration from countries Obama designated “of concern” is actually pretty smart.
See me, being as stubborn as I am, would change all the wording and do another EO That says basically the same thing. I’d keep doing that until the courts run out of judges and willpower.
That’s what I said. Change the wording and issue another one that says more or less the same. When they go to court don’t even fight them. Just issue another. Keep going til they run out of patience and willpower.
That is the real problem. Monday morning at 8AM the Senate Republicans need to meet and replace McConnell as majority leader. He is too old and has no fire in his belly. Then covene 12 Noon on schedule and start going nuclear. Go into continuous floor session, passing rule changes or whatever to get Sessions as AG and Gorsuch on the S.C. Along the way DeVos and Perry and some other confirmations need to happen too, but those are side shows. If dims want roll call votes, give them roll call votes - at 3AM if necessary.
A federal judge just thumbed his nose not just at Donald Trump, but at the US Congress and rule of law. What are THEY going to do about it - leave it until we have a civil war or do their clear duty under the oaths of their office?
The situation is crazy. There are 2,758, according to Wikipedia, district court judges in the U.S. Imagine if the President is subject to restraint on any given day by any of them who happens to have a case before him on an issue where he disagrees with the determinations of the Federal process. Just issue an "indefinite TRO" until he can decide the issue.
That is, of course, an invitation to insanity. There are only two questions here, did the President have the discretion to exclude a class of individuals from this country? Did he exercise that discretion "reasonably" i.e. did he have a soundly stated rationale for his decision.
Since one court concluded Yes to the latter, in a carefully worded opinion, the matter is concluded. Other judges may disagree with the rationale, but they are not empowered to substitute their judgment for the President's judgment.
Why not today. I have already written Cornyn and Cruz demanding that the turtle either move, with some uncharacteristic alacrity, or be [re]moved.
Truthfully, I was hoping you would tell me I am wrong. Bash me as a never Trumper or some thing else. So does this mean.. these,very same judges will block the wall? Trump has already said we would have to work something out with the dreamers, so amnesty is his idea. The immigration pause was rolled out like a kindergarten plan because money obviously can’t buy sound counsel. Sounds like he is being advised by enemies. Yes, look stupid and incompetent. The visa issue was both of those things. It’s going to be a,long four years.
Yes. Or they will try.
Remember, walls come in many forms. Men and equipment can form a wall.
Trump has already said we would have to work something out with the dreamers, so amnesty is his idea.
There may be some 'give' there.
The immigration pause was rolled out like a kindergarten plan because money obviously can’t buy sound counsel.
Nonsense. With the exception of having a waiver in place for certain classes of people (those who worked on our behalf, for example), this was rolled out just fine.
Sounds like he is being advised by enemies. Yes, look stupid and incompetent.
You consume too much Ministry of Propaganda Media 'news' if you believe that.
It’s going to be a,long four years.
Two corrections: Eight years, and it will be long for our enemies.
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.