[sargon]

Leave them in the Middle-East, I don’t care what they do in a society that seems to allow things like they are doing.

Here, we just don’t need to expose our citizens to that stuff.

Send them back.

While such a policy might seem "harsh", I believe it's legitimate and justifiable on both moral and Constitutional grounds.

What's the relevant U.S. Code. Let's see. Here it is: 8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens.

From section (f):

Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline.

Not only does the President unabiguously have the power which President Trump has been exercising, but that power is indeed plenary.

The fact that this routine Presidential power has been negated by Leftist judges is one of the biggest federal judicial travesties to have occurred in the last century or so, and if the US Supreme Court does anything short of smacking down these lower courts—as hard as they've ever been smacked—then we will know beyond the shadow of a doubt that that august body—as currently Constituted—is part and parcel of the Swamp.

[Edward.Fish]

The fact that this routine Presidential power has been negated by Leftist judges is one of the biggest federal judicial travesties to have occurred in the last century or so, and if the US Supreme Court does anything short of smacking down these lower courts—as hard as they've ever been smacked—then we will know beyond the shadow of a doubt that that august body—as currently Constituted—is part and parcel of the Swamp.

Ah, but we already know that they are part of the swamp; arguably they are the most corrupt and lawless of all the leaders in government:

1. KENTUCKY v . KING - In which the Supreme Court acknowledged the mandatory nature of Warrants due to the 4th Amendment… immediately followed by a "test" for allowing that to be ignored because of exigency.
2. KELO et al. v. CITY OF NEW LONDON et al. - In which the court decided that imaginary tax revenue (projections) qualified as public use for the 5th Amendment.
3. The refusal to hear the case of California's Proposition 9 - By which the court asserted that (a) the states are wholly vassals of the the federal government, and (b) that the Supreme Court of a state cannot certify standing in a case.
4. Wickard v. Filburn - In which the court determined that congress's powers of interstate commerce applied within the state as well… despite the obvious fact that the same clause empowering regulation over interstate commerce also applies to international commerce and any analogous assertion against foreign states could be considered an act of war.
5. NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS v. SEBELIUS, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES - In which the court decided that it had legislative powers.

And so on...

[DoughtyOne]

I agree with your conclusions there.