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

Exactly. A pinhead who said that the security briefings were boring and repetitious and not worth his valuable time. Of course he is correct since he does know more than the generals and has totally dismissed the intelligence agencies.

 

You mean those intelligence agencies who insisted Iraq had WMD's? Maybe the agencies that said ISIS is the JV's. Make up your mind.

 

No they based it on Rudi and Trump mentioning a Muslim ban during the campaign which should never even have been brought up

- - - Updated - - -

Weve already had at least two recently

 

Yes because the smarter ( of course a relative term) members of the Trump administration have finally figured out that the first EO had no chance of passing Supreme Court review. Exactly what the Dems have known all along. A ban based on religion would not stand and now even the Trump cluster fook has figured that out.

Maybe now they will actually find within their feeble intellects an actual plan to improve US security although given their short but incompetent record that does seem unlikely.

 

Trump played them like a fiddle. They got all in a huff and stopped his temp ban, now they're wondering if they did the right thing or not. Ineffectual hand-wringing sissies, as always. Meanwhile Trump has something new coming for them to cry about. Tennis anyone?

 

LOL! Nah, the bone headed political decision by the Judges has put them and the dems on the hook for any terror attacks that happen. President Trump could have had the State Department, DOJ and Homeland Security do basically the same thing this EO does. Instead he made an EO that would be blocked by the judicial branch hence letting him off the hook. I can see him now saying "well I tried to keep America safe but my efforts were obstructed".....hahaha!

Once again President Trump has pwned the left!

 

No idea.

I prefer no one is attacked, but that's just me. Not sure if you meant me in the "you guys," but laugh away, if it suits you. I thought we were having an adult conversation, tho. My bad.

I don't know who those people were any more than you do. I highly doubt they had lots of people shipped in to attend a Jason Chaffetz town hall on a Thursday night in Salt Lake City,. Some of the people there Chaffetz knew, so there's that. Of course, you'd have to watch the video to know that. Occams' Razor tells me they probably were from that district, but you're welcome to think what you want.

 

If you really believed that you would be for the EO

 

Some people believe anything the Mainly Swamp Media says.

 

Certainly the news media and many here were treating it like some "win," until the 9th turned on itself and got all kerflunkus. Many here were arguing that national security is still Trump's responsibility, even though it was denied him. It didn't make sense, and it still doesn't. That's why the 9th is confounded and become an Ourobus, a snake that eats it's own tail.

 

Tell us why France is building a wall around the Eiffel Tower. Oh yeah, no such thing as terrorism. How do you get the sand out of your ears?

 

Baloney they did not withdraw the EO. If decide strictly on constitutionality and its merits it will pass SCOTUS

 

I remember when the claim was that we are in a hundred year war against radical Islam. Islam = muslims. So why in the heck would we (if we had any brains) import the enemy into our country?

 

The 9th appellate is seeking an en banc review of the earlier 3 judge ruling. Seems this isn't settled in the slightest.

Cheers

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/bre...ts-another-vote-on-trump-travel-ban-decision/

In a rare move, one of the judges on the Ninth Circuit of Appeals has made a request that a vote be taken as to whether the order issued by the three judges Thursday night should be reconsidered en banc, which means before 11 federal judges of the Ninth Circuit. It’s not clear if this means that this judge (who was not named in the order) believes that there are enough votes to overturn the lower court’s decision which put a temporary halt on Trump’s controversial travel ban or if the judge simply wasn’t satisfied with the panel’s decision. Regardless, it is an interesting move that could bode well for President Trump, and throws yet another legal twist into the ongoing court battle between Trump and those trying to prevent his controversial immigration ban from being enforced.

 

It could be a ploy to show that the court is unanimous in the decision to block the EO.

 

Looks like the 9th is going to reconsider it's ruling.

What a great baseball game this is becoming! Top of the first just two weeks in and what a game!

Fun!

Cheers

 

That's valid, but it give the government another crack at presenting it's case. Frankly I don't think the court wants this battle with the Executive and Congress. The ruling put the court into real time Foreign and National Security issues, a place it cannot function in with any success.

IMO, wiser minds seem to be asserting themselves.

Cheers

 

What will you say if they are in agreement with the decision?

 

Then the court is playing politics. Currently as it stands the court has ruled, no more is necessary nor will it change the outcome.

I'd like to think the Court doesn't play games in an attempt to guild the lilly.

Cheers

 

He did the same when when making Elizabeth Warren the face of the Democratic party. The Dems were floundering before the election, not realizing what was going to hit them, and they're playing the same losing game after the election. Now, as you say, they're the party who doesn't want to keep America safe.

 

We might see if the Court plays games in an attempt to guild the lilly.

 

On balance it is "all" from the left. The town hall meeting chaos was caused by lefties who flooded the zone and would not let Chaffetz speak. That's the norm for the liberal progressive left these days. They still refuse to take the time to understand why they lost the election and behavior like the Chaffetz town hall is one of the reasons.

DeVos will do just fine. She is well prepared to ensure that low income kids have the same access to a quality education than those with the financial means to do so. It's about time that the R's have had the opportunity to help those kids gain the human capital through education that will result in comfortable and productive lives. The D's certainly haven't done anything.

 

If I believed the EO would keep us safe, I would be for it. I don't believe it will, therefore...

 

I read the entire ruling. The entire decision is based on the rule of law. There was no need to mention the INA because the INA does not supersede the Fifth Amendment and offers no additional insight on when a TRO might be warranted.

 

TIL: Trumpers believe that France is building a 984 ft. wall around the Eiffel Tower.