Sudan should be on the list - isn’t that where the recent church murderer is from?
The 9th will challenge this revised plan, maybe SCOTUS will weigh in on that.
Why do we even need a travel ban? The whole world should know by know that AmeriKa is a terrible place and led by a white supremacist. Why would anyone want to come here? /S
I don’t have time to process this. Good news or bad news?
Wouldn’t it be a good idea to include NFL players in the ban?
Since Venezuela and N. Korea are now on the list, they can’t claim that it’s Islamophobia anymore, not that that will stop them, or that it was ever a legitimate claim.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1D5Sa2Yq-2g&list=RDQM9qv3gShkPfA
Sounds good to me. There are a lot of countries who hates us anyway.
This issue is not "travel". The issue is invasion. This is a most basic constitutional issue that mandates the federal government stop invasion.
The United States...shall protect each [state] against invasion
U.S. Const. art. IV, sec. 4.
Trump's argument is first and foremost a Constitutional argument, not a federal statute argument. Illegal immigration and immigration of our enemies are INVASION which the Constitution specifically mandates the federal government to prevent. Don't repeat the Lying Leftists Labels. This and related articles should be posted as an Invasion Ban Order.
It’s fine that on 9-11, SCOTUS apparently agreed with this constitutional mandate that Trump is enforcing, but either way, Trump should be (and I think is) proceeding on the basis of the Rule of law of the Constitution which is the Supreme Law of the Land over the federal government including the courts and SCOTUS (U.S. Const. art. VI, cl. 4).
Yeah I heard it 3 hrs ago... :)
The headline is misleading to say the least. The case is still up for review, but the Court postponed the oral argument in light of recent executive action and want to give the parties time to address it. Which is very sensible.
It’s not that they won’t hear the case. Clickbait.
Also see:
http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/25/politics/travel-ban-3-0-could-derail-supreme-court-case/index.html
“In general, when one policy expires and a new policy is developed, the court may consider any challenge to the expired policy to be moot,” said Irv Gornstein, the executive director of the Supreme Court Institute at Georgetown Law. Gornstein stressed he was talking generally, but he suggested that if the parties are no longer affected by the new policy, or its impact has changed, there may not be the injury that is necessary to establish a case — potentially meaning things will have to start anew. “
Banning all m*slims is an excellent idea. Permanently, and retroactively.
So these countries are 100 % Muslim? If so, why ?
” ... the real fact that the administration’s order is still a Muslim ban.”
Are these legalists saying that like it’s a bad thing? What’s bad about keeping out murderous Islamacists?
A lot of them act on jihad, thinking it pleases their god, but all of them believe it.
The ACLU is always saying crazy **** like this.
Sudan is the most fundamentalist Islamic country in the world!
The world has gone crazy. Religion should never been protected by the Civil Rights Act.
Let the communist scream, take it to the communist plants in the courts but our President has the authority to do it under the law. DO NOT BACK DOWN...ef them and protect our Nation by doing the right thing.
Appeasing the Communists among us and their Islamic allies will only get us killed.
I don't see Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan, or Indonesia on the list... for starters. Guess he whiffed on a whole lotta Muslims in this Muslim ban.