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.
Seriously though...I'm OK with it, it protects those who have a relationship or school here. I know most liberals won't be. But this isn't a victory for Trump yet either.
But I also agree with Thomas in that the wording of their order is going to "burden executive officials with the task of deciding — on peril of contempt — whether individuals from the six affected nations who wish to enter the United States have a sufficient connection to a person or entity in this country,"
And in that I think, its made things worse. I view it as a court hoping it will all go away by the time its heard, instead of doing their job and deciding things. Additionally from a constitutional view the compromise fails to address major issues.
So its not the victory Waldo thinks, its a compromise thats designed to make it moot by the time its heard.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,419,437 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
LOL. *except for the blatently illegal parts
Seriously though...I'm OK with it, it protects those who have a relationship or school here. I know most liberals won't be. But this isn't a victory for Trump yet either.
But I also agree with Thomas in that the wording of their order is going to "burden executive officials with the task of deciding — on peril of contempt — whether individuals from the six affected nations who wish to enter the United States have a sufficient connection to a person or entity in this country,"
And in that I think, its made things worse. I view it as a court hoping it will all go away by the time its heard, instead of doing their job and deciding things. Additionally from a constitutional view the compromise fails to address major issues.
So its not the victory Waldo thinks, its a compromise thats designed to make it moot by the time its heard.
But should we protect one who has something like a flight school here without them being thoroughly vetted?
I look at Saudi Arabia's well documented history of funding radical Madrassahs teaching hatred of the west and see no reason for them to be omitted from the list. To me they're the worst kind of 'friend', one who happily shakes your hand while their other hand reaches behind you with the dagger. What's to say they won't make it easy for a potential attacker of America to obtain a Saudi passport?
I'm honestly worried about the Americans abroad in countries that this ban might draw hostility from.
What happened to Otto Warmer in North Korea was horrific, and as more and more of the planet becomes a no-go area for Americans, that might be more commonplace. I hope anyone in the affected countries (or in countries that are allies to them) get out of there pronto and fly back home or at least go to a non-affected country.
I'm glad I travelled so much already... Americans are going to be increasingly unwelcome in more and more places.
And now for the next step: hold accountable the judges that attempted an illegal power grab by trying to tell the president that the is not allowed to set immigration policy.
This was a coup d'etat, pure and simple. They are now simply inventing constitutional principles that don't exist merely to enact their agenda against the American people.
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.