We will lose. Unless Gorsuch is on the court, it will be 4-4 remanded, or even 5-3 with asswipe Kennedy siding with libs.
They won’t take it to the Supreme Court for that very recent..they will wait.
Umm...the word ‘lose’ is not in the Trump dictionary.
Sooner or later President Trump, or rather We the People, will win.
Napolitano seems to think Kagan might swing in favor of the EO.
That’s how I see it too. If an attack happens and it’s somebody that was let into the country that otherwise would not have been had this been allowed to stand, then we know where the blame lies.
I agree we’ll lose. POTUS would be better off to rescind this order and issue a new EO with same results. He could do this repeatedly for the three months he wanted to vet.
But I love President Trump’s fighting spirit. God love him.
If they want to use the courts this blatantly, we should introduce a bill to divide the 9th circuit into four sections. Give two small areas to each of two adjoining districts. Divide the remainder into two new district court of appeal panels. We have the majority, ram it down just like Obama Care was passed.
The Constitution is very clear that the Pres has the power to restrict immigration at his discretion. The 1965 immigration law is clearly unconstitutional yet has never been contested.
Impeach the judge(s) for violating the Constitution.
IMPEACH THEM.
... and whose to say Gorsuch will even side with the President, after reading all this garbage about him being
closer to Kennedy than Scalia..
huge sighs!!
I sure hope creates a new EO vs. waiting on SC ruling.
The Dems knew Trump would do this- and had this all planned out. Now we get to listen to the Dems and media bash Trump some more and just beam with joy with their win and rub it in our noses.
I wish Trump would have waited; even had Republican law scholars look at the EO and make sure it was full-proof.
The most impressive thing Trump does is turn losses into victories. He lost Colorado, but complained believably that it was a rigged selection, which boosted him. His losses were critical to him winning. In the primaries he was just in the pack until he railed against importing terrorists. Everyone condemned him, but then the Paris terror attacks happened, and the Orlando terrorists attacks happened, propelling him to the lead.
The same thing can happen here. While it would be a tragedy to have a terror attack from a new immigrant let in by this ruling, it would probably destroy the democrat party, not Trump. The American people are watching this. They see Trump trying to protect them, and the democrats and judges protecting the terrorists.
While we wait for the next inevitable terrorist attack, Trump has 100 federal judges to appoint, 31 red state governors appoint judges, and we can do a thousand things to help Trump.
Second it.
Not only did that judge have no legal right to issue the proclamation he did, but no court has jurisdiction over an EO declared by a sitting President.
Now he's been bamboozled into thinking that he has to abide by the crooked corrupt 9th circuit decision to stop his perfectly legal and applicable Executive order
Alexander Hamilton agrees with this.
This is all a big farce, it's #fakenews. The judicial has no power to attack the president the way they are.
In Federalist Paper #78, Alexander Hamilton stated, in part:Trump and his people need to enforce the ban and ignore the court challenges as they have NO RIGHT to do so."It proves incontestably, that the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power 1; that it can never attack with success either of the other two; and that all possible care is requisite to enable it to defend itself against their attacks. It equally proves, that though individual oppression may now and then proceed from the courts of justice, the general liberty of the people can never be endangered from that quarter; I mean so long as the judiciary remains truly distinct from both the Legislature and the Executive. For I agree, that "there is no liberty, if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and executive powers."
2 And it proves, in the last place, that as liberty can have nothing to fear from the judiciary alone, but would have every thing to fear from its union with either of the other departments.
1. The celebrated Montesquieu, speaking of them, says: "Of the three powers above mentioned, the judiciary is next to nothing." Spirit of Laws. Vol. I, page 186.
I agree. He needs to stay out of the Courts. He was suckered into appearing before a kangaroo Court.
What have we lost? What have they won? The 9th Circus now owns emigration, or, that is what they say.
It seems to me that the court might be able to justify the block of section 3c because it affects people in the US, without a mechanism for hearings.
But I see no justification for blocking sections of 5 which deals with refugees. No state is harmed by not allowing in refugees that aren't already in the U.S..
The only possible justification for block 5 is that of religious discrimination. And the 9th, didn't address that, just said they reserved the right to address it in the future.
SCOTUS should reinstate 5 and evaluate the merits of 3c.
In the mean time, Trump needs to rewrite 3c to better accommodate people already in the U.S..
If the court ties 4-4, the issue can be revisited after the 9th justice is seated. If the issue fails 5-3, then he wasn't going to win this battle even with Gorsuch.
In that case: