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

Skip to comments.

Trump seizes on omission in court's travel ban ruling, plots next move
Fox News ^ | 10 Feb 2017 | Judson Berger

Posted on 02/10/2017 7:22:06 AM PST by mandaladon

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 next last
The Justice Department is now reviewing its options -- which include the possibility of appealing the matter to the Supreme Court, asking for a review from a broader panel of judges or taking the dispute back to the lower court. Or the White House could issue a revised order. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I think the best option is SCOTUS after Gorsuch is seated.
1 posted on 02/10/2017 7:22:06 AM PST by mandaladon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

Unless Trump’s goal is to score political points by riling-up the public against the Federal Judiciary.

(which I hope it’s not, as the terror risk imposed by these people is increasing every day).


2 posted on 02/10/2017 7:24:45 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

The omission was deliberate. I think the 9th Circus is cocky under the current circumstances given that SCOTUS is split 4-4 and the lib justices are very prone to circle the wagons when it suits them.


3 posted on 02/10/2017 7:25:15 AM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

But how long is it going to take to get through all the pontificating and get him sworn in?


4 posted on 02/10/2017 7:25:55 AM PST by ichabod1 (The Wise Cracker)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

Issue new EO specifically excluding authorized visa holders and residents.


5 posted on 02/10/2017 7:26:15 AM PST by TexasGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasGator

Or, as suggested here on another thread, take it to the FISA court on national security grounds.


6 posted on 02/10/2017 7:27:24 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

I have to believe he is quietly accomplishing his aims by other means. He doesn’t seem to be all that concerned about it. That’s why I feel like he knows what he’s going to do.


7 posted on 02/10/2017 7:27:52 AM PST by ichabod1 (The Wise Cracker)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TexasGator

I agree. At the very least, it might make liberal judges work on the weekend!


8 posted on 02/10/2017 7:28:19 AM PST by longfellowsmuse (last of the living nomads)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

The President could actually have a little fun with them first, say an Executive Order:

In order to maintain the safety of our Jurist’s, ALL members of the Federal Judiciary SHALL be prohibited form having anyone in their employ or employed on their behalf to be in possession of ANY firearm, Weapon, or Ammunition.

FOR THEIR SAFETY!


9 posted on 02/10/2017 7:28:28 AM PST by eyeamok (destruction of government records.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

Or ignore it completely...


10 posted on 02/10/2017 7:29:19 AM PST by ImJustAnotherOkie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

I think SCOTUS is the right route because it will set the legal precedent for future EOs of a similar nature.

While I don’t mean to imply in any way that a terror attack in the interim would validate Trump’s approach, in fact he is now kind of immunized if it should happen. The court and those who support their action now own this.

If a revised order were issued, it could buy time for Gorsuch to be seated, as I don’t trust the 4-4 split court. And it woudl force them to re-litigate their illegal restraining order which would double-down on this unconstitutiaonal attack on the Presidency.


11 posted on 02/10/2017 7:29:33 AM PST by bigbob (We have better coverage than Verizon - Can You Hear Us Now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

Or the White House could issue a revised order.

That’s the best option. If they strike that one down issue another. Keep them running.


12 posted on 02/10/2017 7:29:40 AM PST by sheana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

No that is a fools errand

Best option is rewrite


13 posted on 02/10/2017 7:31:05 AM PST by Nifster (I see puppy dogs in the clouds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

Trump could stop ALL immigration. I don’t know if there is enough popcorn for that.


14 posted on 02/10/2017 7:32:22 AM PST by bk1000 (A clear conscience is a sure sign of a poor memory.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eyeamok
In order to maintain the safety of our Jurist’s, ALL members of the Federal Judiciary SHALL be prohibited form having anyone in their employ or employed on their behalf to be in possession of ANY firearm, Weapon, or Ammunition.

Won't fly. Separate branch of government. President has no say.

15 posted on 02/10/2017 7:32:24 AM PST by Steely Tom (Liberals think in propaganda)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ichabod1

Gorsuch will not be seated until April 15th at the earliest.


16 posted on 02/10/2017 7:32:35 AM PST by Dacula (I have a disease called AWESOME, you would not understand it since you don't have it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon
See what you think about my comment over here.

It is by no means obvious that Gorsuch will rule for the government in this case (nor is it obvious that Roberts or Kennedy will). He is a member, an obvious member, of the globalist class which is working so hard to destroy popular sovereignty in America, as are virtually all Federal judges and law school graduates since about 1975.

17 posted on 02/10/2017 7:33:10 AM PST by Jim Noble (Die Gedanken sind Frei)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sheana
Or the White House could issue a revised order.

That’s the best option. If they strike that one down issue another. Keep them running.

Agreed. SCOTUS at this stage is too risky and Dems will slow walk Gorsuch.

The broad, sweeping approach did not stick. It's the art of the deal. You start big and learn what your limits are.

Use the Dems playbook and go the incremental route. Issue another less sweeping EO. If the 9th Circus obstructs, issue another, and another.

Let the public see how politicized our courts have become.

18 posted on 02/10/2017 7:34:02 AM PST by randita (PLEASE STOP ALL THE WORTHLESS VANITIES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: mandaladon

Well of course the court didn’t mention the part of the statutes that grant sweeping power to the president. If they did they would have to rule against the Seattle judge.

I agree with you and Judge Napolitano that going straight to the Supremes is the best course. The 9th’s ruling is so unconstitutional Trump should be able to get a 5-3 ruling to uphold the ban.


19 posted on 02/10/2017 7:34:45 AM PST by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasGator

there’s a hook in that law that allows the President to stop ALL immigration.


20 posted on 02/10/2017 7:35:07 AM PST by stylin19a (Terrorists - "just because you don't see them doesn't mean they aren't there")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 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