Breaking: Appeals court upholds ruling blocking Trump's immigration order

What was illegal about it? What was confusing about it?

 

Is that you, Chris Matthews?

Gorsuch is a fair, unbiased judge. You'll never see him call something unconstitutional that isn't unconstitutional.

 

So why are you crying incessantly about 90 days?

 

Common sense tells you that since 2015, terrorism from these areas is ramping up and in order not to have it happen to you, you have to take action. 291 killed, 1220 injured from terrorist attacks in France, Belgium, and Germany in the last 2 years. Learn from other peoples' mistakes.

 

Just found out that the circuit court order did not once site the statute that gives the President the power to limit visas.

 

Still no answer?

- - - Updated - - -

Quickly signed out of your normal user name, and into your other so you could drop a racist post and run away? That's mature.

 

While I may disagree with the travel ban, this sets a very dangerous precedent. We just sent a message to the rest of the world that we cannot lock our doors.

 

The ninth circuit is the most overturned in the history of the United States. They're just trying to protect their record,

 

You see what happens, Donnie? You see what happens, when you try to play King during your first three weeks in the White House?

 

Because there isn't an answer. This is an explicit power afforded to the president, and one that won't be overturned, I don't think. The travel ban will stick. I hope he expands it to Saudi Arabia, post haste.

 

Yeah, hysterical authoritarian liberals will ignore the law and shut him down.

 

Cancel the previous order, issue a new one specifically stating Green Card holders do not come under the entry ban and then dare them to challenge it again.

 

Bush jr is ancient history!

 

You said it. Nobody should be surprised. They are not technically judges; officially they are, but the left can only claim this because they don robes, but it's like dressing Michael Moore, Wolf Blitzer, and Joy Behar in robes. These loons knew exactly how they would rule the second this was proposed. They need to go back to law school, because they do not rule on law, because Trump's EO was totally legal, instead feelings and emotions super cede law to these radical left wing freaks.

 

You can't cry liberals on this one because one of the judges was a Bush appointee and the decision was unanimous. I doubt you understand how rare that is. I don't often post pictures in these threads, but this seems appropriate.



Your messiah is not above the law. This is checks and balances performing as intended and it's beautiful.

 

You would think so, but even if Gorsuch is confirmed, we cannot count on Roberts to side with the law. The guy is a snake, he gave us Ocare!

 

I'd take that bet.

 

Liberals need to quit saying "Bush appointee so he isn't liberal!" Bush was no conservative. The Wall street bailouts, the Iraq War, using our Treasury like his f***ing ATM machine! No, Bush was a moderate.

 

Like Bush was a staunch conservative. Its the establishment vs Trump. There is no check on the courts. Its strange it seems every time the people disagree with some liberal ideas the court steps in and calls it unconstitutional and makes new law.

- - - Updated - - -

Since it cant happen thats very brave of you.

 

You wouldn't have to. obama would just ignore all the federal court rulings.

 

President Trump can very easily bypass this political ruling. By the use of "extreme vetting," screen every single refugee like an Olympic drug tester, and if they originate from one of those 7 countries, send them back. No travel ban needed, and no court can LEGALLY strike down any vetting procedures!

 

Establishment has become a catch-all for trump apologists that they apply to whatever they don't like or stands up to trump. Sorry, it doesn't work that way when cons continually blame liberals for all of their failings. As far as there being no check on the courts, you need to crack open your 7th grade textbook and read about checks and balances. It's beautiful in its simplicity.

 

[/QUOTE]

No it has always been so

There is no check on the court once a person is seated

You libs are all for democracy until the votes dont go your way, then you t=urn to a bunch of un elected lawyers to get your way with no recourse. SCOTUS has become a joke as it all depends on the politics of the judges these days not the law.

 

He certainly wasn't a liberal, which was the premise of your ridiculous argument. You don't get to arbitrarily decide who is conservative and who isn't. By every measure of the actions he took during his two terms, he was decidedly conservative. It's not even up for debate.

 

I'll grant you that the decisions are not, in and of themselves, law, but they do set precedent for future cases, and have been used that way since before 1900. It takes a Constitutional amendment, new legislation, or more recent Supreme Court decision to overturn a SC decision. Overturning a decision is rare.

- - - Updated - - -

Jefferson is your argument, not mine.