Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The hearing in the Virgina Appeals Court was last week, would have been nice for the OP to include an update.
So according to the US attorney the intention of the ban was to give the president time to come up with improved vetting techniques, so where are they.
Wall said the temporary ban was intended to give the government time to evaluate whether people from the six countries were being subjected to adequate vetting to ensure they did not pose a security threat to the United States.
But he said the administration had not been able to proceed on all the work it wanted to do because of the litigation, noting "we have put our pens down."
Poor Trump snowflakes. The system of checks and balances won't allow Donald to ban people due to their religion. Stupid "so-called" judges!
That isn't what the Court is for. They have no "check and balance" function, except the Supreme Court may rule a law "unconstitutional." The Courts cannot even act unless a lawsuit is filed. The Legislative Branch is the least powerful branch of government. The Congress has the most power, with the Executive Branch second in power.
The Courts can only rule on the law. They do not make law. They cannot usurp the President's Constitutional power, which is what they did in this case. That's why they are wrong.
Since you obviously haven't taken a Consitution course, and don't seem to know much about the Court system, how it's created and what kind of power it has (or does not have) or how our government works, you are about 99% wrong too.
It's a little frightening that so many people are eager to completely end our system of checks and balances just so they can make an insane man-baby into our first dictator.
This is a lie.
80% of cases that the Supreme Court agrees to hear are overturned, but that amounts to less than 0.1% of ninth circuit decisions.
OK, I'll repeat it for the 3rd time, next I'll be drawing you mislead people a picture.
You guys keep inserting the Supreme court in here.....
As pointed out in the OP, which you people grazed over and in haste wanted to slam me personally.....
Many of these don't make it to the Supreme Court, because the democrat political capital isn't there in it. It is reversed in another circuit court, 80% of the time in the last 16 years. Since Clinton replaced over 90 Federal litigators.
The overturn rate has been explained many times but you insist that the 9th circuit is the highest in the country, it is not. Like stated you don't even know the detail on any of their decisions which were over turned, besides the fact that over 12,000 cases are filed in their district a year yet you are attempting to make a case out of 8 rulings?
The 9th courts decision wasn't based upon the letter of the law. The USA security and safety has been placed into jeopardy, based upon Politics.
It is treasonous to jeopardize the security and safety of the nations people. That is why the President has the authority to ban anyone for any reason. Even if it were for their radical violent religion.
The ninth circuit pales in comparison to the POTUS obstruction of justice. This is something to watch.
"pales in comparison to the POTUS obstruction of justice."
We will be waiting with baited breathe for your legal justification.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.