|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
02-07-2017, 05:05 AM
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
This is one report on his reasoning:
None of those seem to be about the constitutionality of the EO.
|
sounds like he was ruling based on "feelings" rather than "fact" and "law"
Trump...on the other hand....
The controlling provision of federal immigration law, Section 1182(f), could not be clearer:
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.
sounds like the judge doesn't understand how the system works or how the law reads ...but this is what we've come to expect from so-called progressive justices is it not? Making decisions based on the desired policy result and not the law.
Last edited by scottw; 02-07-2017 at 05:34 AM..
|
|
|
|
02-07-2017, 05:28 AM
|
#2
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,124
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw
sounds like he was ruling based on "feelings" rather than "fact" and "law"
Trump...on the other hand....
The controlling provision of federal immigration law, Section 1182(f), could scarcely be clearer:
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.
sounds like the judge doesn't understand how the system works or how the law reads ...but this is what we've come to expect from so-called progressive justices is it not? Making decisions based on the desired policy result, not the law.
|
Trump hasn't shown "detrimental to the interests of the United States"
he just feels thats the case .... Courts dont go with fake news or feelings and thats why the they put a temporary stop to his order .. he need to provide the evidence of what is detrimental to the interests of the United States and how not just because he says so
|
|
|
|
02-07-2017, 05:36 AM
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
.. he need to provide the evidence of what is detrimental to the interests of the United States and how not just because he says so
|
in which statute did you find this fact?
Judge Robart wrote this at the end of his order....
" Fundamental to the work of this court is a vigilant recognition that it is but one of three equal branches of our federal government. The work of the court is not to create policy or judge the wisdom of any particular policy promoted by the other two branches."
he's apparently a so-called comedian as well
Last edited by scottw; 02-07-2017 at 05:45 AM..
|
|
|
|
02-07-2017, 07:01 AM
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
Courts dont go with fake news or feelings
|
you are aware that Robart's order will now be weighed by the Ninth Circuit, which hold's the distinction of being the most liberal/progressive court in the nation and not coincidentally the most frequently overturned and reversed court in the nation and which once notably ruled the Pledge of Allegiance "unconstitutional" ... in 2011 during the Supreme Court session the high court reversed or invalidated 19 out of 26 decisions reviewed from the 9th Circuit.
that's a pretty bad percentage for a Court/judges ruling based on "law" and not feelings
|
|
|
|
02-07-2017, 08:56 AM
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw
in 2011 during the Supreme Court session the high court reversed or invalidated 19 out of 26 decisions reviewed from the 9th Circuit.
that's a pretty bad percentage for a Court/judges ruling based on "law" and not feelings
|
That alone, tells you unequivocally, what's happening in that 9th circuit (sometimes referred to as the 9th circus court of schlemeels). That court is a liberal activist group. When the Supreme Court (which is not a right wing entity) tells you that you got it wrong 73% of the time, that means you are a moron, and in this case, probably an azzhole.
|
|
|
|
02-07-2017, 08:48 AM
|
#6
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw
sounds like he was ruling based on "feelings" rather than "fact" and "law"
Trump...on the other hand....
The controlling provision of federal immigration law, Section 1182(f), could not be clearer:
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.
sounds like the judge doesn't understand how the system works or how the law reads ...but this is what we've come to expect from so-called progressive justices is it not? Making decisions based on the desired policy result and not the law.
|
In theory, a judge could find that law you cited, to be unconstitutional. It doesn't sound like that was the case here, from Detbuch's post, it sure seems like the judge struck down the ban because he doesn't like it.
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:23 AM.
|
| |