Breaking: 9th Circuit Issues Ruling Not To Protect America's Sovereignty

[Wry Catcher]

9th Circuit rules against reinstating travel ban - CNNPolitics.com

I know. I know. Fake news website, but still...

OMG, really? The most liberal, most overturned court in the country ruled for the left? Stunning, simply stunning ...

Your orange messiah is probably stamping his feet right now while tweeting like a 13 year-old girl.

Why? Do you think he won't control the SCOTUS?

Ignorant of history? Do you have any understanding of the Warren Court, who he was, what party he belonged to and which President appointed him?

See: G52) Judiciary: Earl Warren Flashcards | Quizlet

 

[Contumacious]

That means the ban will not be enforced for now, as the case continues to play out in federal court.

On to the USSC.

Remember , SCOTUS is presently divided 4 liberal vs 4 conservatives. a 4-4 tie means that the 9th Circuit Ruling will be the law.

And that's the way it should be.


.

It won't make it to the Supreme Court before the 90 days expire from the E. O.

Oh, well

 

[basquebromance]

This is a classic subterfuge. the court acts like they are going after executive action, but are really nullifying statute.

 

[brummelben]

The liberals win!

Temporarily. You do know the majority of Americans want this ban. The Left continues to shoot themselves in the foot. We can blame the Democrats for this. No common sense on the left! Waiting for the Congressional Elections.

While that is pretty much true, you have to say that the administration could solve the constitutional problems with the order really easily. Really easily. Why they indulge themselves in the desire to fight rather than just fixing it and reissuing in ten days is beyond me. They get all preachy about how bad this is for America when they can fix it! And I want them to just put it in place NOW!

Its not about how much Americans want the ban, its about its legality

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Ninth Circuit to Trump

 

[Uncensored2008]

That means the ban will not be enforced for now, as the case continues to play out in federal court.

On to the USSC.

Remember , SCOTUS is presently divided 4 liberal vs 4 conservatives. a 4-4 tie means that the 9th Circuit Ruling will be the law.

And that's the way it should be.


.

It won't make it to the Supreme Court before the 90 days expire from the E. O.

120, and I disagree.

This will be a priority, but Gorsuch will be confirmed next week, so the anti-Constitution side will lose and the ban will be enforced. The Executive has the authority to conduct a foreign policy. We will again be a nation of laws.

 

[Manonthestreet]

what do you expect from the 9th District Court of Traitors
I always believed the court were supposed to protect Americans
Another falsehood.comes to light.

The district court judge and one of the appellate judges were "conservatives". They upheld the law. Now the CIA and/or the FBI can conduct a false flag operation and blame the so-called judges.


.

It's time to break up the 9th..they are to big and like 80% of there cases are overulled by the Supreme Court.

..


I read of a bill making its rounds around the house right now.


Break up the 9th !

Be that as it may, the EO violates the immigration Act of 1965.


.

No it doesnt....President has broad authority to do as he pleases with immigration

 

[Dim Bulb]

Lawlessness begets lawlessness. The outrageous ruling by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals sets the country on a dangerous path.

No it is not an outrageous ruling. The performance of the government's lawyer was, however, outrageous. The Judges were presented with a terrible case and made the only ruling they could based off the briefs and the arguments. BUT ALL THIS COULD BE FIXED by the administration within days. They need to make some modifications and reissue. Then we Americans WIN! Why spend time whining about bias, judges, etc unless you don't want to get this vetting in place now?

 

[Missourian]

Temporarily. You do know the majority of Americans want this ban. The Left continues to shoot themselves in the foot. We can blame the Democrats for this. No common sense on the left! Waiting for the Congressional Elections.

2018, right around the corner....

 

[Cowman]

I'm a judge! I'm a judge! Suck my diiiiiiiiiick, I'm a responsible Judge!

 

[Pogo]

9th Circuit? It will go against Trump

What a shocker. They ruled against Trump.

Another court ruling on the politics and not the letter of the law.

Think so?

Let's consult a conservative....

>> The order violates the law. Under the Immigration Act of 1965, the president may not refuse to give visas to immigrants coming to live in the United States permanently due to their nationality. The provision is unequivocal in stating that no person may “be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person’s race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.” While this does not apply to temporary visitors or refugees, I have previously explained in detail why the president cannot legally enforce this order against immigrants who are sponsored by employers or family members in the United States. << --- Five Reasons Congress Should Repeal Rump's Immigrant/Refugee Ban​

 

[Uncensored2008]

what do you expect from the 9th District Court of Traitors
I always believed the court were supposed to protect Americans
Another falsehood.comes to light.

The district court judge and one of the appellate judges were "conservatives". They upheld the law. Now the CIA and/or the FBI can conduct a false flag operation and blame the so-called judges.


.

It's time to break up the 9th..they are to big and like 80% of there cases are overulled by the Supreme Court.

..


I read of a bill making its rounds around the house right now.


Break up the 9th !

Be that as it may, the EO violates the immigration Act of 1965.


.

In what way?

 

[basquebromance]

"SEE YOU IN COURT" - Trump on twitter

I imagine the voice Trump uses in threatening federal courts is the same one I use while trying to order at the Chick fil-A drive thru.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Of all the sources in the world McRacist voluntarily chooses to go with Jim Fucking Hoft in a factual statement that has no room for a hair-on-fire crackpot slant anyway.

Well, it wouldn't be surprising for you to refer to the Constitution in the same manner:


Foreign Policy Powers
The president or his designated representative, such as the Secretary of State, has the exclusive authority to communicate with other nations, recognize foreign governments, receive ambassadors, and make executive agreements. Throughout U.S.history, Congress and the courts have granted the president great deference in conducting foreign policy. This deference is based, in part, on the need for one person, rather than 535 members of Congress, to represent and speak for a national constituency.

These powers were illustrated in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C. President George W. Bush warned the Taliban government of Afghanistan to surrender Osama bin Laden and other terrorists or face the possibility of war. In the months leading up to the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, President Bush, Secretary of State Colin Powell, and other representatives lobbied the United Nations for support of the U.S. position on Iraq.

In addition to the authority to recognize foreign governments, the president is empowered by Article II to make treaties with foreign nations, subject to the consent of the Senate. A treaty is an agreement between two or more nations containing promises to behave in specified ways.

Executive agreements are international compacts that the president makes with foreign nations without the approval of the Senate. They do not have the same legal status as treaties unless they are subsequently ratified by the Senate. The Constitution does not expressly give the president the power to make executive agreements. However, this power has been inferred from the president's general constitutional authority over foreign affairs. At one time, executive agreements involved minor matters, such as postal relations and the use of radio frequencies. Since the 1930s, however, presidents have negotiated important foreign policy issues through these agreements rather than through treaties. The Supreme Court has recognized that an executive agreement is legally equivalent to a treaty and therefore the supreme law of the land. Executive agreements enable the president to achieve results while avoiding the uncertainty of treaty ratification.

Foreign Policy Powers

 

[Norman]

Where were all these appeals as Obama signed death drones all over?

When he banned Iraqis and Venezuelans?


Nowhere, because he approved the leftist religion. Thankfully, Trump has a bit more spine. He won't take bullshit. The snowflakes will continue crying as Trump's restrictions are upheld for the betterment of America.

 

[peabody]

That means the ban will not be enforced for now, as the case continues to play out in federal court.

On to the USSC.

Remember , SCOTUS is presently divided 4 liberal vs 4 conservatives. a 4-4 tie means that the 9th Circuit Ruling will be the law.

And that's the way it should be.


.

Gorsuch will be confirmed before this reaches the SCOTUS, putting 5 Constitutionalists on the court. Washington state has no authority to make foreign policy, hence the absurd lower court and 9th circus rulings will be vacated.

Gorsuch hates Trump already. He will vote to uphold the ban.

Gorsuch calls Trump comments about judges 'disheartening and demoralizing'

 

[basquebromance]

The judges made a decision based on emotion not one of law.

 

[Cowman]

The judges made a decision based on emotion not one of law.

False.

 

[basquebromance]

While 9th Circuit plays activist, a 13-year-old American girl was raped by a Muslim refugee from...Sudan

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump 19s20 seconds ago SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!