Calls To Ban Muslims From Entering the U.S. Are Offensive And Unconstitutional

[jc456]

That's actually your upper lip.


Apparently not enough if we're letting people in from countries where the populations hate us.

What countries have populations that hate us? name them

Let's just narrow it down to all Muslim countries...k?

We have never had a problem with refugees- why make a big deal now

We are at war with radical Islam. It makes sense to keep them at bay.

Do we have a problem with the Muslims who live in this country

Dude, you, , you, I have no idea where you're from.

 

[jc456]

Trump supporters are furious about this. Trump has betrayed his conservative base on many fronts, and he is quickly losing support

huh?

It's true. Trump supporters are turning against him and he's only been in office less than a month!

well it's been ten days and no one has stopped supporting him. But we understand why you like to lie.

 

[basquebromance]

U.S. Exempts Green Card Holders From Trump’s Travel Ban

 

[basquebromance]

The Exec Order wasn't radical. At all. Pretty mundane really. Lets pause our refugee program for a few days. What's radical is the reaction

 

[basquebromance]

 

[basquebromance]

 

[HaShev]

Ummm,
this is not about religion least you admit the "Countries" that are "Temp" Banned are religiously intolerant that you assume them all Muslim while not protesting other faiths banned from that country's ban. *Oops*
Those Countries are not only uninclusive they also have Religious intolerance that incudes Sectarianism bigotry that is not specific to
religion. It means any discrimination or hatred arising from perceived differences between subdivisions (sects) within a group, such as between different denominations of a religion , class, regional or factions of a political movement.
Since theCountry and not faiths are banned then if you claim it a Muslim ban you are admitting their intolerance of other faiths not ours and you'd be displaying intolerance and support of intolerance to those other religions being predjudiced against in those countries. That Means Schumer is supporting predjudices against his own supposed religion as are all the other sympathizers of these countries intollerances. Ironic that the Countries crying are blasting their reflection of their intollerant behavior against Americans and many religions and cultures.

In conclusion the removal of the word Temporary, and use of religion over Country is proof propaganda is politically motivated and the cause of hate and fear baiting.
Any claim this enhances radical recruitment means that blame is on the Liberal manipulation and propaganda which is displacing blame onto the oarty they are demonizing for political motive.
=epic fail....they think you the people are too stupid to notice.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

.

First on CNN: Justice Department will not defend executive order on travel restrictions
Source: CNN

The acting Attorney General Sally Yates has told Justice Department lawyers not to make legal arguments defending President Donald Trump's executive order on immigration and refugees, according to sources familiar with the order.

Yates, an Obama appointee who is serving until Trump attorney general nominee Jeff Sessions is confirmed, does not believe the substance of the order is lawful, according to the sources.

Her order is enforced only until she leaves office.

Currently, there are cases filed in at least five states including Virginia, New York, Massachusetts, Washington and California that are challenging Trump's order.

Read more: First on CNN: Justice Dept. will not defend executive order on travel restrictions - CNNPolitics.com

 

[bripat9643]

It's true if the intent is to prevent a religious group from entering the Country like FDR did to the Jews fleeing from Nazi atrocities but the intent of Trump's executive order is to prevent potential terrorists from countries that exploit terrorists from entering the U.S. Why don't we all agree on that concept?

I have no problem with banning all Muslims from entering the U.S. Islam is a barbaric belief system fit only for savages. It has no place in a civilized country.

 

[bripat9643]

.

First on CNN: Justice Department will not defend executive order on travel restrictions
Source: CNN

The acting Attorney General Sally Yates has told Justice Department lawyers not to make legal arguments defending President Donald Trump's executive order on immigration and refugees, according to sources familiar with the order.

Yates, an Obama appointee who is serving until Trump attorney general nominee Jeff Sessions is confirmed, does not believe the substance of the order is lawful, according to the sources.

Her order is enforced only until she leaves office.

Currently, there are cases filed in at least five states including Virginia, New York, Massachusetts, Washington and California that are challenging Trump's order.

Read more: First on CNN: Justice Dept. will not defend executive order on travel restrictions - CNNPolitics.com

And you believe someone cares about this, why?

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

...Says Mike Pence.

However President Trump is clearly not banning all muslims from entering the United States. This is a statement usually made by those liberals uninformed of the facts.

 

[Contumacious]

...Says Mike Pence.

Exactly., so ruled the DC Court of Appeals


Trump’s Immigration Ban Is Illegal


"appellants claim the discrimination violates 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1152(a) of the INA. This section provides "no person shall ... be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person's ... nationality ... or place of residence." Appellants argue that the Department violated the statute in drawing an explicit distinction between Vietnamese nationals and nationals of other countries when refusing to process the visas of the screened out Vietnamese immigrants. Appellants assert this statute compels this court to invalidate any attempt to draw a distinction based on nationality in the issuance of visas. In contrast, appellees urge us to adopt the position that so long as they possess a rational basis for making the distinction, they are not in violation of the statute. Appellees maintain the goal of encouraging voluntary repatriation and the aims of the CPA certainly provide a rational basis for the practices and policies in question.


We agree with appellants' interpretation of the statute. Congress could hardly have chosen more explicit language. While we need not decide in the case before us whether the State Department could never justify an exception under the provision, such a justification, if possible at all, must be most compelling--perhaps a national emergency. We cannot rewrite a statutory provision which by its own terms provides no exceptions or qualifications simply on a preferred "rational basis." Cf. Haitian Refugee Ctr. v. Civiletti, 503 F.Supp. 442, 453 (S.D.Fla.1980) (under 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1152(a), INS has no authority to discriminate on the basis of national origin, except perhaps by promulgating regulations in a time of national emergency).


45 F.3d 469

310 U.S.App.D.C. 168

LEGAL ASSISTANCE FOR VIETNAMESE ASYLUM SEEKERS; Thua Van Le;
Em Van Vo; Thu Hoa Thi Dang; Truc Hoa Thi Vo, Appellants
v.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE, BUREAU OF CONSULAR AFFAIRS, et al., Appellees



.

 

[basquebromance]

Like John Adams, Abe Lincoln, 2 Roosevelts, Harry Truman, Jimmy Carter & Obama before him, what Trump did was legal.

Sorry Would-Be Scholars, Trump’s Refugee Ban is Legal and Follows Example Set By Founders

/thread

 

[Don Foreskeen]

Trump supporters are furious about this. Trump has betrayed his conservative base on many fronts, and he is quickly losing support

I am not furious.
This fucking mess was created by stupido obama when he coward by not following the red line in the sand. He is a pendejo.

 

[mamooth]

That's a 5-year-old in handcuffs.

I know, the Trump-thugs just got a serious tingle up their leg.

 

[namvet]

...Says Mike Pence.

8 Dec 2015. need glasses or a cane??

 

[OKTexas]

Trump supporters are furious about this. Trump has betrayed his conservative base on many fronts, and he is quickly losing support

They are? How do you figure? The Trumpsters seem to be in full support of this travel ban.

Conservatives are pissed that Trump hasn't banned Muslims like he said he would and they feel betrayed by his cabinet appointees. It's only been a few weeks and he has lost the support of his base. It's very sad.

huh?

It's true. Trump supporters don't like him anymore and many of them are switching over to Elizabeth Warren for inspiration

What the hell have you been smoking?

 

[Contumacious]

Like John Adams, Abe Lincoln, 2 Roosevelts, Harry Truman, Jimmy Carter & Obama before him, what Trump did was legal.

Sorry Would-Be Scholars, Trump’s Refugee Ban is Legal and Follows Example Set By Founders

/thread

BULLSHIT

Founding Fathers James Madison (the author of the Constitution) and Thomas Jefferson OPPOSED the law - the law was allowed to expire in 1800 - we had NO IMMIGRATION LAW FOR 89 YEARS

UNTIL THE CHINESE "EMERGENCY" (wink, wink)

4. Resolved, That alien friends are under the jurisdiction and protection of the laws of the State wherein they are: that no power over them has been delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the individual States, distinct from their power over citizens. And it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared, that “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people," the act of the Congress of the United States, passed on the — day of July, 1798, intituled “An Act concerning aliens,” which assumes powers over alien friends, not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void, and of no force.


Thomas Jefferson

 

[OKTexas]

That's a 5-year-old in handcuffs.

I know, the Trump-thugs just got a serious tingle up their leg.

So tell us skippy, how'd the girl put that piece of paper in her mouth if her hands are cuffed behind her back?

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

If it was up to me I wouldn't let anyone in from countries that hate us. And all these Muslim countries hate us. No need to take any chances.

lol, wow. How would you guys like to peek around the inside of this guy's brain for an hour? Sheesh. You're probably scared of your own farts too.

My farts are lethal!

We need to be selective with whomever we let in to the country. Period. We owe Muslims nothing.

We have always been selective with the people who are allowed into this country. No need to change

When the CIA director and the FBI director tell us we can't adequately vet these people, then it makes sense to not bring them in.

No one EVER said that, sorry

FBI Director James Comey added in congressional testimony last month that “a number of people who were of serious concern” slipped through the screening of Iraq War refugees, including two arrested on terrorism-related charges. “There’s no doubt that was the product of a less than excellent vetting,” he said.

Although Comey said the process has since “improved dramatically,” Syrian refugees will be even harder to check because, unlike in Iraq, U.S. soldiers have not been on the ground collecting information on the local population. “If we don’t know much about somebody, there won’t be anything in our data,” he said. “I can’t sit here and offer anybody an absolute assurance that there’s no risk associated with this.”

Senior Obama officials have warned of challenges in screening refugees from Syria