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

[ScienceRocks]

 

[Contumacious]

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has denied the government’s request to put a stay on a temporary restraining order issued by a federal court judge, putting President Donald Trump’s travel ban on hold.

Thank you judges

Pretty spurious logic that the Constitution grants foreigners the "right" enter America. With Gorsuch on the court, Trump (and the actual Constitution) will prevail.

For argument's sake I am going to ignore the Constitution's ORIGINAL INTENT , which conservatives like to do.

The Immigration Act of 1965 prevents the executive branch from denying immigration on account of the applicant's religious or national origin.

.

 

[Pogo]

This is insane. If an enemy attacks us, are we supposed to wait for permission from judges to defend ourselves?

There doesn't appear to be anything in the EO about "enemies (not counting Rump himself) attacking us". The EO does however mention seven countries, the combined total citizens of which have committed zero terrorist acts here. Meanwhile it does not mention, say, Saudi Arabia, Egypt or the UAE where most of the 9/11 hijackers came from. What a curious coincidence it is that Rump has business interests in all three of those countries --- and has none in the despised seven. Purely by chance I'm sure.

 

[whitehall]

In 2012 the 9th Circuit was reversed in 86% of it's cases. Clearly the court prides itself in it's failure and political agenda just like the democrat party..

 

[TemplarKormac]

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​

Lol, the author, David Bier is contributor to the Huffington Post. You'll have to do better than that.

 

[Wry Catcher]

That court has been overruled more than any other.

Who is going to over rule them?

The Supreme Court has overruled them several times. Some of those rulings were unanimous! lol

They have been overruled, and efforts to "pack" the court of unpack it by conservatives goes to a stab in the heart of checks and balances. For a balanced review of the 9th see:

How 'liberal' reputation of 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is overblown, scholars say

Link was written before today's ruling.

 

[ScienceRocks]

 

[GaryDog]

This is an attempted judicial coup against the government of the United States of America and the President.

You're fucking retarded, aren't you?

 

[Pogo]

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.

Interesting you should bring that up, since Pakistan, which harbored Bin Laden, isn't on the EO list either. I seem to remember Shrub saying something about making no distinction between being terrorists and harboring them. Guess that was too "low energy".

 

[Uncensored2008]

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.

That's different, because OBAMA AKBAR!

 

[TemplarKormac]

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​

Read the damn law.

(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.


8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

 

[Hossfly]

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

Negative. As of the 9th Court of Appeal's decision, it's about the first terror attack by a terrorist posing as a refugee. Lawd have mercy on liberal pukes when that happens. Break out the body bags, Myrtle!

 

[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​

Lol, the author, David Bier is contributor to the Huffington Post. You'll have to do better than that.

It's Cato. Read the URL.

Is a writer not allowed to write for more than one site on your planet?

 

[GaryDog]

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​

Read the damn law.

(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.


8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

Presidents don't get to enforce illegal EOs.

It's really that simple. Sorry, but unlike your dream homeland, Iran, we have an independent judiciary.

 

[TemplarKormac]

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.

Interesting you should bring that up, since Pakistan, which harbored Bin Laden, isn't on the EO list either. I seem to remember Shrub saying something about making no distinction between being terrorists and harboring them. Guess that was too "low energy".

Moving the goalposts, too. You're being dishonest, Pogo.

 

[Manonthestreet]

funny how Obama had broad authority to ignore immigration law but try to pause anything for just a bit why thats highly constrained .......libs talking out of both sides of their asss again

 

[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.


.

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'

Kewl, you repeat a thoroughly debunked lie to support your absurd position, that you got from the Soros hate sites.

 

[GaryDog]

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​

Lol, the author, David Bier is contributor to the Huffington Post. You'll have to do better than that.

It's Cato. Read the URL.

Is a writer not allowed to write for more than one site on your planet?

He's scared, and doesn't agree with it, so he's lashing out.

 

[TemplarKormac]

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​

Lol, the author, David Bier is contributor to the Huffington Post. You'll have to do better than that.

It's Cato. Read the URL.

Is a writer not allowed to write for more than one site on your planet?

Well, according to the rules on your planet, no:

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

 

[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.


.

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'

Gorsuch is going to be another David Souter

He is NOT a friend of gun owners nor of the 4th Am.


.