another hollywood has-been trying for 15 minutes more....

[wdmso]

Trump later implied that if an attack occurs, federal Judge James Robart should be blamed: "Just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril. If something happens blame him and court system. People pouring in. Bad!"

Wow he really doesn't understand how the the System works

Feeling over facts again

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Trump later implied that if an attack occurs, federal Judge James Robart should be blamed: "Just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril. If something happens blame him and court system. People pouring in. Bad!"

Wow he really doesn't understand how the the System works

Feeling over facts again

I saw that tweet attacking the judge, made me cringe. Let Sean Hannity do personal attacks, the POTUS should be above that.

"he really doesn't understand how the the System works "

Could be that the judge (if he is advocating for a personal cause instead of relying on the law) also doesn't understand how the system works.

Here is a sincere question...how does Trump's ban, interfere with the Constitutional rights, of anyone covered by the Constitution? What was the legal basis for the judge's decision? I didn't see it.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I saw that tweet attacking the judge, made me cringe. Let Sean Hannity do personal attacks, the POTUS should be above that.

"he really doesn't understand how the the System works "

Could be that the judge (if he is advocating for a personal cause instead of relying on the law) also doesn't understand how the system works.

Here is a sincere question...how does Trump's ban, interfere with the Constitutional rights, of anyone covered by the Constitution? What was the legal basis for the judge's decision? I didn't see it.

Ask these people

The top legal officials in 16 states, including Pennsylvania and Iowa which voted for Trump, filed a memorandum in support of efforts to halt the travel ban. The state attorneys general from these states argue they have standing as the executive order inflicts harm on states, including disruption at state universities and medical institutions.

The states include New York, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Vermont, the Commonwealths of Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, as well as the District of Columbia.


and he's not a liberal Judge

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Ask these people

The top legal officials in 16 states, including Pennsylvania and Iowa which voted for Trump, filed a memorandum in support of efforts to halt the travel ban. The state attorneys general from these states argue they have standing as the executive order inflicts harm on states, including disruption at state universities and medical institutions.

The states include New York, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Vermont, the Commonwealths of Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, as well as the District of Columbia.


and he's not a liberal Judge

Did you see the law that Scott posted? We have a 'supremacy clause' which says that federal law trumps state law. There is a federal law that gives the POTUS the authority to do exactly what Trump did, and I presume that law was signed by a president other than Donald Trump.

WDMSO, I don't doubt that a lot of people don't like this ban. Not liking it, and having the authority to disregard it, are not the same thing. I don't like paying my state income tax, it imposes severe hardship on my family, I could do a lot more for my kids if I didn't have to bear that burden. So can I declare my house a 'sanctuary' from the state income tax? Or can only liberals pick and choose which laws they feel like obeying, and which they feel like disregarding?