Trump's Muslim ban is NOT unconstitutional!!

[PoliticalChic]

I look in vain in the Constitution for where the president has unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country based on nationality and/or religion.

It's not based on nationality or religion, dummy. It's based on national security. And yes, he not only has the authority, he has the duty.

So he's specifically making the case based on the country people are coming from and their religion, but that has nothing to do with nationality or religion? Find for me in Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution where the President is given authority to ban people from entering the country all on his own.

I do enjoy seeing conservatives suddenly completely uninterested in what the Constitution says all of a sudden. Very amusing.

You may tap dance around it all you like....post #65 applies.

Except it doesn't, as I've already shown. Repeating yourself without responding to the criticism of the specifics is meaningless.

Except it does.

 

[Conservative65]

Obama Banned all Iraqi Refugees for 6 Months in 2011, Liberals SAID NOTHING!

They found Iraqis terrorist and one country for 6 months. Get a grip, why is not SA on the list or Qatar, two very well known terrorist countries, or the UAE?? Turkey?

So you're using the "it was different" excuse for Obama? Why didn't you say so.

None of the states he has banned has killed any US citizen, on US soil. Also Syria and Iraq never invited Americans with guns to come in and do a coup. Did they? Also what we did to N. Korea was beyond disgrace. We think we are so high and mighty, if it was not for our coups , these people would not want to come here.

If it weren't for people like you willing to allow them here and get handouts, they wouldn't come.

 

[Conservative65]

Obama Banned all Iraqi Refugees for 6 Months in 2011, Liberals SAID NOTHING!

They found Iraqis terrorist and one country for 6 months. Get a grip, why is not SA on the list or Qatar, two very well known terrorist countries, or the UAE?? Turkey?

So you're using the "it was different" excuse for Obama? Why didn't you say so.

None of the states he has banned has killed any US citizen, on US soil. Also Syria and Iraq never invited Americans with guns to come in and do a coup. Did they? Also what we did to N. Korea was beyond disgrace. We think we are so high and mighty, if it was not for our coups , these people would not want to come here.

is a "war on terror" even Constitutional. Our War on Iraq ended already.

It's as Constitutional as the war on poverty.

 

[saveliberty]

Obama Banned all Iraqi Refugees for 6 Months in 2011, Liberals SAID NOTHING!

They found Iraqis terrorist and one country for 6 months. Get a grip, why is not SA on the list or Qatar, two very well known terrorist countries, or the UAE?? Turkey?

So you're using the "it was different" excuse for Obama? Why didn't you say so.

None of the states he has banned has killed any US citizen, on US soil. Also Syria and Iraq never invited Americans with guns to come in and do a coup. Did they? Also what we did to N. Korea was beyond disgrace. We think we are so high and mighty, if it was not for our coups , these people would not want to come here.

is a "war on terror" even Constitutional. Our War on Iraq ended already.

What part of national security and terrorists attacks within the US is still allowing your brain to support terrorists?

 

[Brynmr]

I look in vain in the Constitution for where the president has unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country based on nationality and/or religion.

It's not based on nationality or religion, dummy. It's based on national security. And yes, he not only has the authority, he has the duty.

So he's specifically making the case based on the country people are coming from and their religion, but that has nothing to do with nationality or religion? Find for me in Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution where the President is given authority to ban people from entering the country all on his own.

I do enjoy seeing conservatives suddenly completely uninterested in what the Constitution says all of a sudden. Very amusing.

You may tap dance around it all you like....post #65 applies.

Except it doesn't, as I've already shown. Repeating yourself without responding to the criticism of the specifics is meaningless.

Except it does.

I believe Jimmy Carter did something like this with the Iranians. Of course the idiot Left didn't complain because Carter was a Democrat.

 

[Brynmr]

There is no Moslem ban, you twit.

why do they call it that? what kind ban is it?

No one calls it that but Liberals who are trying to control the narrative - aka LYING. It's a temporary ban on people coming from countries that pose a threat to our security.

 

[Brynmr]

did you miss the article about how terrorism is relative depending on the amount of crony capitalism involved?

This guy stole your hat.

 

[badger2]

Capitaloislamochristianity Morphing

Now Canada flaps its lips to welcome the other half of the pathology.

"Except that this crazy race reaches its limits with California on one side and Japan on the other. The second pathway for Capital has looped back on itself, the world has closed up and the system is saturated. Consequently, it is perhaps along the North-South axis that the fate of the third voice/pathway, of self-reference, will be played out. That is what I would like to call the barbarian compromise. The old walls of the limits of barbarianism have been irremediably disintegrated, deterritorialized. The last shepherds of monotheism have lost their sheep, because the new subjectivity is no longer the sort that can be gathered in a flock. And now it is Capital that is starting to shatter into animist and machinic polyvocality."
(Felix Guattari, 1989)

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I look in vain in the Constitution for where the president has unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country based on nationality and/or religion.

It's not based on nationality or religion, dummy. It's based on national security. And yes, he not only has the authority, he has the duty.

So he's specifically making the case based on the country people are coming from and their religion, but that has nothing to do with nationality or religion? Find for me in Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution where the President is given authority to ban people from entering the country all on his own.

I do enjoy seeing conservatives suddenly completely uninterested in what the Constitution says all of a sudden. Very amusing.

You can sit in your chair an amuse yourself endlessly but the fact is it's been done before so I'd say you're full of shit.

Trump's Immigration Ban Recalls Past Laws
Speaking with ABC News' David Muir on Wednesday, Trump previewed the ban, saying it concerned "countries that have tremendous terror."

While Trump’s executive action marks a significant shift in decades of U.S. immigration policies, it isn't the first time the U.S. has restricted immigration from specific countries.

Pierce of the Migration Policy Institute pointed to three past instances -- the banning of Chinese immigration in the 1880s, national origin immigration quotas and restrictions in the 1920s, and a brief 1980 halt of new visas for Iranian immigrants.

That unconstitutional actions have been done in the past doesn't make them constitutional now.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I look in vain in the Constitution for where the president has unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country based on nationality and/or religion.

The Constitution’s text and the various Supreme Court cases interpreting this text suggest that the federal government has the exclusive power to enact and enforce the nation’s immigration laws.

"The Constitution says three things about the responsibility of the federal government for the national defense.

National defense is the priority job of the national government.
National defense is the only mandatory function of the national government.
National defense is exclusively the function of the national government.

U.S. Constitution - Article 2 Section 1 - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution is the relevant portion regarding the powers of the President of the United States, and nowhere does it give the president unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country. So whatever authority is given to the "national" government generally, says nothing about what the president specifically can do.

The Constitution grants to the Federal Government sole authority on Immigration and relevant laws grant to the President the power to ban a country or Countries based on his order.

Where does the Constitution grant the president power to unilaterally do so? Not in Article 2 where the president's powers are listed.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I do enjoy seeing conservatives suddenly completely uninterested in what the Constitution says all of a sudden. Very amusing.

We're just not interested in your false narrative. And btw that door swings both ways. LOLOL

LOLOL I didn't support Obama, genius. As for false narrative, please find the relevant part of the Constitution that says the president can unilaterally ban people from entering the country.

The Congress granted the President the power dumb ass. Or are you arguing the Federal Government does not control immigration. Already linked for you.

When did they vote on this executive order?

 

[Brynmr]

I look in vain in the Constitution for where the president has unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country based on nationality and/or religion.

The Constitution’s text and the various Supreme Court cases interpreting this text suggest that the federal government has the exclusive power to enact and enforce the nation’s immigration laws.

"The Constitution says three things about the responsibility of the federal government for the national defense.

National defense is the priority job of the national government.
National defense is the only mandatory function of the national government.
National defense is exclusively the function of the national government.

U.S. Constitution - Article 2 Section 1 - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution is the relevant portion regarding the powers of the President of the United States, and nowhere does it give the president unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country. So whatever authority is given to the "national" government generally, says nothing about what the president specifically can do.

The Constitution grants to the Federal Government sole authority on Immigration and relevant laws grant to the President the power to ban a country or Countries based on his order.

Where does the Constitution grant the president power to unilaterally do so? Not in Article 2 where the president's powers are listed.

Refute post #96 or shut the Hell up.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I do enjoy seeing conservatives suddenly completely uninterested in what the Constitution says all of a sudden. Very amusing.

We're just not interested in your false narrative. And btw that door swings both ways. LOLOL

LOLOL I didn't support Obama, genius. As for false narrative, please find the relevant part of the Constitution that says the president can unilaterally ban people from entering the country.

The Congress granted the President the power dumb ass. Or are you arguing the Federal Government does not control immigration. Already linked for you.

Sssshhh...he's busy amusing himself. Let him finish and mop up the mess first.

I think he's licking his wounds.

That must be it.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I look in vain in the Constitution for where the president has unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country based on nationality and/or religion.

The Constitution’s text and the various Supreme Court cases interpreting this text suggest that the federal government has the exclusive power to enact and enforce the nation’s immigration laws.

"The Constitution says three things about the responsibility of the federal government for the national defense.

National defense is the priority job of the national government.
National defense is the only mandatory function of the national government.
National defense is exclusively the function of the national government.

U.S. Constitution - Article 2 Section 1 - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution is the relevant portion regarding the powers of the President of the United States, and nowhere does it give the president unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country. So whatever authority is given to the "national" government generally, says nothing about what the president specifically can do.

The Constitution grants to the Federal Government sole authority on Immigration and relevant laws grant to the President the power to ban a country or Countries based on his order.

Where does the Constitution grant the president power to unilaterally do so? Not in Article 2 where the president's powers are listed.

Refute post #96 or shut the Hell up.

Address literally any of my posts.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I look in vain in the Constitution for where the president has unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country based on nationality and/or religion.

It's not based on nationality or religion, dummy. It's based on national security. And yes, he not only has the authority, he has the duty.

So he's specifically making the case based on the country people are coming from and their religion, but that has nothing to do with nationality or religion? Find for me in Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution where the President is given authority to ban people from entering the country all on his own.

I do enjoy seeing conservatives suddenly completely uninterested in what the Constitution says all of a sudden. Very amusing.

You may tap dance around it all you like....post #65 applies.

Except it doesn't, as I've already shown. Repeating yourself without responding to the criticism of the specifics is meaningless.

Except it does.

Article 2 gives no power to the president to ban people unilaterally, which you've now repeatedly failed to address.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I look in vain in the Constitution for where the president has unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country based on nationality and/or religion.

It's not based on nationality or religion, dummy. It's based on national security. And yes, he not only has the authority, he has the duty.

So he's specifically making the case based on the country people are coming from and their religion, but that has nothing to do with nationality or religion? Find for me in Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution where the President is given authority to ban people from entering the country all on his own.

I do enjoy seeing conservatives suddenly completely uninterested in what the Constitution says all of a sudden. Very amusing.

You can sit in your chair an amuse yourself endlessly but the fact is it's been done before so I'd say you're full of shit.

Trump's Immigration Ban Recalls Past Laws
Speaking with ABC News' David Muir on Wednesday, Trump previewed the ban, saying it concerned "countries that have tremendous terror."

While Trump’s executive action marks a significant shift in decades of U.S. immigration policies, it isn't the first time the U.S. has restricted immigration from specific countries.

Pierce of the Migration Policy Institute pointed to three past instances -- the banning of Chinese immigration in the 1880s, national origin immigration quotas and restrictions in the 1920s, and a brief 1980 halt of new visas for Iranian immigrants.

That unconstitutional actions have been done in the past doesn't make them constitutional now.

It is not unconstitutional you have been shown the law involved.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I look in vain in the Constitution for where the president has unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country based on nationality and/or religion.

The Constitution’s text and the various Supreme Court cases interpreting this text suggest that the federal government has the exclusive power to enact and enforce the nation’s immigration laws.

"The Constitution says three things about the responsibility of the federal government for the national defense.

National defense is the priority job of the national government.
National defense is the only mandatory function of the national government.
National defense is exclusively the function of the national government.

U.S. Constitution - Article 2 Section 1 - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution is the relevant portion regarding the powers of the President of the United States, and nowhere does it give the president unilateral authority to ban people from entering the country. So whatever authority is given to the "national" government generally, says nothing about what the president specifically can do.

The Constitution grants to the Federal Government sole authority on Immigration and relevant laws grant to the President the power to ban a country or Countries based on his order.

Where does the Constitution grant the president power to unilaterally do so? Not in Article 2 where the president's powers are listed.

The Congress gave him the authority you dumb ass as we have told you several times.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

It's not based on nationality or religion, dummy. It's based on national security. And yes, he not only has the authority, he has the duty.

So he's specifically making the case based on the country people are coming from and their religion, but that has nothing to do with nationality or religion? Find for me in Article 2 of the U.S. Constitution where the President is given authority to ban people from entering the country all on his own.

I do enjoy seeing conservatives suddenly completely uninterested in what the Constitution says all of a sudden. Very amusing.

You may tap dance around it all you like....post #65 applies.

Except it doesn't, as I've already shown. Repeating yourself without responding to the criticism of the specifics is meaningless.

Except it does.

Article 2 gives no power to the president to ban people unilaterally, which you've now repeatedly failed to address.

Congress created a Constitutional law delegating the authority to the President as you have been shown repeatedly. The Constitution delegates to the Federal Government all Immigration authority and Congress passed a law giving the President the authority to halt immigration, the law has been linked about 5 times now.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I do enjoy seeing conservatives suddenly completely uninterested in what the Constitution says all of a sudden. Very amusing.

We're just not interested in your false narrative. And btw that door swings both ways. LOLOL

LOLOL I didn't support Obama, genius. As for false narrative, please find the relevant part of the Constitution that says the president can unilaterally ban people from entering the country.

The Congress granted the President the power dumb ass. Or are you arguing the Federal Government does not control immigration. Already linked for you.

When did they vote on this executive order?

They don't have to the LAW as has been linked to repeatedly was created and gives the authority to the President.

 

[Wiskers Von Pussyboots]

Obama Banned all Iraqi Refugees for 6 Months in 2011, Liberals SAID NOTHING!

They found Iraqis terrorist and one country for 6 months. Get a grip, why is not SA on the list or Qatar, two very well known terrorist countries, or the UAE?? Turkey?

And we've found hundreds of muslims joining and providing material support for isis and plotting attacks from across the Muslim world within our country

Ten US cases of refugee Islamic terror arrests/convictions

Refugee Resettlement Watch

580 Terror Convictions in U.S. Since 9/11, 380 Are Foreign-Born

Another 41 Muslim "Refugees" in U.S. Arrested on Jihad Terror Charges - The Geller Report