Hawaiian judge blocks Trump's new immigration ban EO: Did the judge say what law(s) it violated?

[Avatar4321]

Can anyone explain how the EO issued for national security purposes & immigration regulation doesn't have a primary secular purpose?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The law is not an unconstitutional ban on muslims, to get there, the judge had to incorporate whole sections of Trump's campaign and torment them into the argument. None of which was before the court. That's what will make this very easy for the Supreme Court to overrule.

News from The Associated Press

 

[oreo]

It has nothing to do with being a citizen, is has everything to do with the ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE in the U.S. Constitution.

the ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Explain to us how a temporary moratorium on immigration violated ANY portion of the Establishment Clause. If you cant do that, then explain to us how it applies to non-citizens in a foreign country.

Apparently these District Court judges watched Trump's campaign and actually do pay attention to the NEWS, and comments coming out of senior Trump campaign advisers.

I doesnt matter what anybody said. What matters is what was presented to the court, or are these judges violating the free speech clause of the First Amendment?

All the judge, did while grasping at straws, was apply non-applicable laws to non-citizens on foreign soil. A fail on all counts. If the 9th Circus Court of Appeals has even a modicum of competancy they will strck down the lower court's decision. But I won't hold my breath for the most overturned court in the land.

If it hadn't been for Trump's public comments on T.V. along with public statements from several Senior members of his campaign, there probably wouldn't have been a problem with the 1st executive order.

Rewriting it--presents the same problem because of those prior statements and that is why this Judge has bombed on it again.

Reading doesn't hurt--because the JUDGE will explain it to you that issued the bomb on the first executive order, and why it's flopped again.
Hawaii judge blocks new travel ban; Trump calls it 'judicial overreach' - CNNPolitics.com

 

[bripat9643]

Foreign citizens actually have no Jurisdiction in a domestic court .

None.

They cannot claim the rights of a US citizen.

What The Left has been doing is infiltrating our Judicial System with Activist Constitutionalist Deconstructionists.

These people are also Globalist and believe The US and it's citizens should be beholden to and subjugated by foreign courts.

This is another way Globalists attempt
to dissolve The National Sovereignty of
A Nation and they do it through gradualism one corrupt court decision at a time.

And I read the damn 43 page Brief this so called judge whipped up in an hour.

He did not cite one relative case or precedent that a foreign government or foreign person can Challenge a temporary travel ban and an Executive Order in a US Court.

It was 43 pages of horse shit and nothing but an attempt at subverting our right to National Sovereignty.

The Administration should actually ignore the stay because the stay is unlawful.

It has nothing to do with being a citizen, is has everything to do with the ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE in the U.S. Constitution. You cannot ban people from entering this country based on their religion.

The Federal District Court Judge sees this as a MUSLIM BAN--because of Trump and his coherts big mouths. That campaigned and get on T.V. specifically FOX NEWS and kept referring to his executive order as a MUSLIM BAN. Trump himself raised eyebrows and is cited by the judge in the lower article in comments he made himself on CNN.

A little reading really won't HURT.
Trump’s Executive Order Is an Unconstitutional Attack on Muslims. It Must Be Struck Down In Its Entirety.
Judge blocks new travel ban; Trump calls it 'judicial overreach' - CNNPolitics.com

Apparently these District Court judges watched Trump's campaign and actually do pay attention to the NEWS, and comments coming out of senior Trump campaign advisers.

Apparently you are an imbecile who doesn't know the first thing about the Constitution. We attack Muslims every day with drones, bombs and machine guns. Is the war on terror "unconstitutional?"

CAN YOU READ--then maybe you'll figure out why his second executive order flopped again, or are you just going to continue to blather on about anything with your middle finger stuck in the air.

It's one thing to be stupid about something, but it's quite a different thing when you're insisting on remaining stupid.
Hawaii judge blocks new travel ban; Trump calls it 'judicial overreach' - CNNPolitics.com
Trump’s Executive Order Is an Unconstitutional Attack on Muslims. It Must Be Struck Down In Its Entirety.

How does your cite disprove what I posted?

 

[bripat9643]

It has nothing to do with being a citizen, is has everything to do with the ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE in the U.S. Constitution.

the ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Explain to us how a temporary moratorium on immigration violated ANY portion of the Establishment Clause. If you cant do that, then explain to us how it applies to non-citizens in a foreign country.

Apparently these District Court judges watched Trump's campaign and actually do pay attention to the NEWS, and comments coming out of senior Trump campaign advisers.

I doesnt matter what anybody said. What matters is what was presented to the court, or are these judges violating the free speech clause of the First Amendment?

All the judge, did while grasping at straws, was apply non-applicable laws to non-citizens on foreign soil. A fail on all counts. If the 9th Circus Court of Appeals has even a modicum of competancy they will strck down the lower court's decision. But I won't hold my breath for the most overturned court in the land.

If it hadn't been for Trump's public comments on T.V. along statements along with several Senior members of his campaign, there probably wouldn't have been a problem.

Reading doesn't hurt--because the JUDGE will explain it to you that issued the bomb on the first executive order, and why it's flopped again.
Hawaii judge blocks new travel ban; Trump calls it 'judicial overreach' - CNNPolitics.com

Horseshit. Those judges would have granted the stay regardless of what anyone on the campaign said. Futheremore, nothing anyone said is grounds for overruling Trump's EO.

 

[bripat9643]

Republicans can feel safe in knowing that terrorists aren't going to target their empty land. And I'm sure that among those are many that hope terrorists target our cities.

You put a terrorist in the White House who is targeting the entire country, our system of government and your sorry ass as well.

At least I don't assume the position...

We didn't put Obama in the White house, douche bag.

 

[Avatar4321]

It has nothing to do with being a citizen, is has everything to do with the ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE in the U.S. Constitution.

the ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Explain to us how a temporary moratorium on immigration violated ANY portion of the Establishment Clause. If you cant do that, then explain to us how it applies to non-citizens in a foreign country.

Apparently these District Court judges watched Trump's campaign and actually do pay attention to the NEWS, and comments coming out of senior Trump campaign advisers.

I doesnt matter what anybody said. What matters is what was presented to the court, or are these judges violating the free speech clause of the First Amendment?

All the judge, did while grasping at straws, was apply non-applicable laws to non-citizens on foreign soil. A fail on all counts. If the 9th Circus Court of Appeals has even a modicum of competancy they will strck down the lower court's decision. But I won't hold my breath for the most overturned court in the land.

If it hadn't been for Trump's public comments on T.V. along with public statements with several Senior members of his campaign, there probably wouldn't have been a problem with the 1st executive order.

Rewriting it--presents the same problem because of those prior statements and that is why this Judge has bombed on it again.

Reading doesn't hurt--because the JUDGE will explain it to you that issued the bomb on the first executive order, and why it's flopped again.
Hawaii judge blocks new travel ban; Trump calls it 'judicial overreach' - CNNPolitics.com

I read the judges decision. He said that national security and immigration regulation are not primary secular purposes. That's absurd

 

[charwin95]

The racist President and his bigoted minions strike out again.

Score reality 2, psycho right wing minions 0.

All that home schooling made you people communication deficient. You don't know how to talk to normal people.

Time to ignore the illegal and unconstitutional blocking. I hope a terrorist attack hits San Fransissyco or Jew York City....certainly deserve it!

You need to check yourself in Dude.

 

[charwin95]

With all respect I ask for the third time....... can somebody answer this?


where does it say "Any judge can overrule a President on matters of National Security and Immigration?"

Well the judge just did that. Isn't it? So why are you still looking for an answer?

 

[usmbguest5318]

Another thing worth noting about the updated travel ban is that Trump removed Iraq from the list of banned nations. That he did so is especially noteworthy because Trump referred to two individuals whom he claimed were Iraqi nationals (they were) who were involved in terrorist acts (they were not). His original order specifically states:

For example, in January 2013, two Iraqi nationals admitted to the United States as refugees in 2009 were sentenced to 40 years and to life in prison, respectively, for multiple terrorism-related offenses.​

Looking at the court documents pertaining to those two individuals -- Mohanad Shareef Hammadi and Waad Ramadan Alwan -- one finds that they were not convicted or even charged with attempting to carry out a terror attack on U.S. soil despite some erroneous media reports to the contrary.

The FBI's sting operation that caught them (the "Bowling Green" incident, if you will) was designed to show the two terrorists shipping weapons and money abroad to support insurgent operations against American forces in Iraq, not against Americans on U.S. soil and thus not something that would have been germane to keeping Americans safe via a travel ban on Iraqis coming to the U.S. Alwan and Hammadi thought they were providing material and money for insurgents to kill Americans abroad—a serious crime but not one targeting Americans on U.S. soil.

But let's assume for argument's sake that Hammadi and Alwan, or actors like them were to obtain a weapon and changed their minds and elected to use it in the U.S. Well, they are Iraqi nationals, so why, then, did Trump remove Iraq from the banned nations? Who knows? The answer doesn't even matter. What matters is that even where there was an ultra-thin shred of debatability regarding including one of the nations Trump seeks to ban, more than than is for all the remaining nations, Trump removed that nation from the list. WTF?

Seeing that move, one has to presume that the only purposes for the ban have nothing to do with actually ensuring domestic tranquility as it were, unless that calm is to be found in not riling his lunatic fringe of Trumpkins who might plausibly be expected to rise up in utter and violent revolt if Trump didn't/doesn't ban somebody Muslim and from the Middle East. Given that we'e had some 15 Saudi nationals kill ~3K Americans in the U.S., one can only wonder why Saudi Arabia isn't among the banned nations?

 

[GWV5903]

Shot the SOB...

 

[ScienceRocks]

Trump just got fucked in the ass once again. What a loser!!!

hahahhaha

 

[oreo]

It has nothing to do with being a citizen, is has everything to do with the ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE in the U.S. Constitution.

the ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Explain to us how a temporary moratorium on immigration violated ANY portion of the Establishment Clause. If you cant do that, then explain to us how it applies to non-citizens in a foreign country.

Apparently these District Court judges watched Trump's campaign and actually do pay attention to the NEWS, and comments coming out of senior Trump campaign advisers.

I doesnt matter what anybody said. What matters is what was presented to the court, or are these judges violating the free speech clause of the First Amendment?

All the judge, did while grasping at straws, was apply non-applicable laws to non-citizens on foreign soil. A fail on all counts. If the 9th Circus Court of Appeals has even a modicum of competancy they will strck down the lower court's decision. But I won't hold my breath for the most overturned court in the land.

If it hadn't been for Trump's public comments on T.V. along with public statements with several Senior members of his campaign, there probably wouldn't have been a problem with the 1st executive order.

Rewriting it--presents the same problem because of those prior statements and that is why this Judge has bombed on it again.

Reading doesn't hurt--because the JUDGE will explain it to you that issued the bomb on the first executive order, and why it's flopped again.
Hawaii judge blocks new travel ban; Trump calls it 'judicial overreach' - CNNPolitics.com

I read the judges decision. He said that national security and immigration regulation are not primary secular purposes. That's absurd

Any President's primary responsibility is to protect this country and can use executive orders to do it. That's not an issue. Obama did it by banning anyone coming into this country from Iraq for 6 months.

The problem is that Trump and members of his campaign continually referred (verbally) to it as a MUSLIM ban.

"The Establishment Clause forbids the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion.”

"If Trump’s previous comments aren’t enough evidence, consider what his adviser Rudy Giuliani admitted on Saturday night while being interviewed on Fox News: Giuliani explained how he helped Trump create a Muslim ban that would also be legal, per the president’s request. “When he first announced it, he said, ‘Muslim ban,’ ” Giuliani explained.

He called me up and said, “Put a commission together. Show me the right way to do it legally.” I put a commission together … and what we did was we focused on, instead of religion, danger. The areas of the world that create danger for us. Which is a factual basis. Not a religious basis. Perfectly legal, perfectly sensible, and that’s what the ban is based on. It’s not based on religion. It’s based on places where there are [sic] substantial evidence that people are sending terrorists into our country. But unfortunately for Trump and Giuliani, an unconstitutional executive order does not become lawful because it is dressed up in fatuous legalese." (here Guiliani actually describes how it was done on FOX News, and what the pretense was about.)
Trump’s Executive Order Is an Unconstitutional Attack on Muslims. It Must Be Struck Down In Its Entirety.

So if you want to blame anyone--blame FOX NEWS & Rudi Guiliani, and the Presidential tweets, and all the others that surround Trump who have continually referred to this as a Muslim ban.

This is the problem when Presidents and their campaign advisers are always on the news making comments like this that these District Court Judges are WATCHING--and if they're not watching, you can be assured that immigration lawyers will bring these video tapes into court to make certain the Judge watches them.

THAT'S THE PROBLEM

 

[Billo_Really]

We didn't put Obama in the White house, douche bag.

And for all you bullshit bitching and made up protests, you didn't take him out of the office either.

 

[bripat9643]

We didn't put Obama in the White house, douche bag.

And for all you bullshit bitching and made up protests, you didn't take him out of the office either.

When did I claim otherwise? However, we're all thankful he's gone. the nightmare is over.

 

[Billo_Really]

When did I claim otherwise? However, we're all thankful he's gone. the nightmare is over.

It wasn't a nightmare; it was more like IDS.

 

[bripat9643]

It has nothing to do with being a citizen, is has everything to do with the ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE in the U.S. Constitution.

the ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Explain to us how a temporary moratorium on immigration violated ANY portion of the Establishment Clause. If you cant do that, then explain to us how it applies to non-citizens in a foreign country.

Apparently these District Court judges watched Trump's campaign and actually do pay attention to the NEWS, and comments coming out of senior Trump campaign advisers.

I doesnt matter what anybody said. What matters is what was presented to the court, or are these judges violating the free speech clause of the First Amendment?

All the judge, did while grasping at straws, was apply non-applicable laws to non-citizens on foreign soil. A fail on all counts. If the 9th Circus Court of Appeals has even a modicum of competancy they will strck down the lower court's decision. But I won't hold my breath for the most overturned court in the land.

If it hadn't been for Trump's public comments on T.V. along with public statements with several Senior members of his campaign, there probably wouldn't have been a problem with the 1st executive order.

Rewriting it--presents the same problem because of those prior statements and that is why this Judge has bombed on it again.

Reading doesn't hurt--because the JUDGE will explain it to you that issued the bomb on the first executive order, and why it's flopped again.
Hawaii judge blocks new travel ban; Trump calls it 'judicial overreach' - CNNPolitics.com

I read the judges decision. He said that national security and immigration regulation are not primary secular purposes. That's absurd

Any President's primary responsibility is to protect this country and can use executive orders to do it. That's not an issue. Obama did it by banning anyone coming into this country from Iraq for 6 months.

The problem is that Trump and members of his campaign continually referred (verbally) to it as a MUSLIM ban.

"The Establishment Clause forbids the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion.”

"If Trump’s previous comments aren’t enough evidence, consider what his adviser Rudy Giuliani admitted on Saturday night while being interviewed on Fox News: Giuliani explained how he helped Trump create a Muslim ban that would also be legal, per the president’s request. “When he first announced it, he said, ‘Muslim ban,’ ” Giuliani explained.

He called me up and said, “Put a commission together. Show me the right way to do it legally.” I put a commission together … and what we did was we focused on, instead of religion, danger. The areas of the world that create danger for us. Which is a factual basis. Not a religious basis. Perfectly legal, perfectly sensible, and that’s what the ban is based on. It’s not based on religion. It’s based on places where there are [sic] substantial evidence that people are sending terrorists into our country. But unfortunately for Trump and Giuliani, an unconstitutional executive order does not become lawful because it is dressed up in fatuous legalese." (here Guiliani actually describes how it was done on FOX News, and what the pretense was about.)
Trump’s Executive Order Is an Unconstitutional Attack on Muslims. It Must Be Struck Down In Its Entirety.

So if you want to blame anyone--blame FOX NEWS & Rudi Guiliani, and the Presidential tweets, and all the others that surround Trump who have continually referred to this as a Muslim ban.

This is the problem when Presidents and their campaign advisers are always on the news making comments like this that these District Court Judges are WATCHING--and if they're not watching, you can be assured that immigration lawyers will bring these video tapes into court to make certain the Judge watches them.

THAT'S THE PROBLEM

What people have said about the law isn't relevant. Judges aren't supposed to rule based on people's opinions. They are supposed to rule based on the fact.

Here's a fact: The Constitution gives Congress sole authority to control immigration. The Bill of rights applies only to people on American soil. It doesn't apply to foreigners residing on foreign soil.

That's all that needs to be said about the matter.

 

[bripat9643]

When did I claim otherwise? However, we're all thankful he's gone. the nightmare is over.

It wasn't a nightmare; it was more like IDS.

We know it wasn't a nightmare for useless ticks on the ass of society like you.

 

[Billo_Really]

What people have said about the law isn't relevant. Judges aren't supposed to rule based on people's opinions. They are supposed to rule based on the fact.

Here's a fact: The Constitution gives Congress sole authority to control immigration. The Bill of rights applies only to people on American soil. It doesn't apply to foreigners residing on foreign soil.

That's all that needs to be said about the matter.

Actually, if you live within 100 miles of any US border, you ain't got no Bill of Rights.

 

[Billo_Really]

We know it wasn't a nightmare for useless ticks on the ass of society like you.

That was harsh. I always treated you with respect.