Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-04-2017, 03:42 PM
 
Location: San Diego
50,327 posts, read 47,080,006 times
Reputation: 34089

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by doggiedog9 View Post
Nap time at taxpayers expense
I wonder if she actually has a caregiver.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-04-2017, 03:42 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,231,797 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheCityTheBridge View Post
So, you don't think the Constitution applies to the federal govenment?
You will need to explain. Mine was the Constitutional argument. Maybe you didn't recognize it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2017, 03:42 PM
 
27,214 posts, read 46,767,070 times
Reputation: 15667
Quote:
Originally Posted by tripleh View Post
9th circuit loses again
It sounds like 3x is not a charm for 9 th circuit court judges!

What a bunch of losers as common sense shows that yhisbtravel ban was not discriminatory but just to making the vetting better!

Now we need the wall!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2017, 03:43 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,231,797 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatBob96 View Post
What?

People who supported the ban were screaming this from the rooftops when bleeding heart terror sympathizers were crying "Muslim Ban!!"

We KNEW the SC would overturn the 9th circuit.
Did you have a disagreement with what I said somewhere? I said the lower rulings would be over turned from the beginning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2017, 03:44 PM
 
9,617 posts, read 6,067,889 times
Reputation: 3884
Since it is meaningless, explain why the lower Cory’s blocked it. An answer other than liberal obstruction is BS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
Yes, I would argue there are very few Americans in those countries, and very few people from those countries would attempt to travel to US. It has been next to impossible to get a visas in those countries with or without a ban. In other words, the whole thing is meaningless, especially when Saudi Arabia is missing from the list. As a matter of fact, it will probably cause more harm than good.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2017, 03:44 PM
 
34,300 posts, read 15,664,869 times
Reputation: 13053
I'm not tired of winning.
Trump doesn't look tired either.
The future is bright and the country is moving in the right direction finely and finally.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2017, 03:46 PM
 
Location: Palo Alto
12,149 posts, read 8,422,794 times
Reputation: 4190
7-2 indicates a slam dunk!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2017, 03:48 PM
 
Location: NC
5,129 posts, read 2,599,470 times
Reputation: 2398
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmyy View Post
But not Saudi Arabia.
Not Indonesia either! Isnt that where most Muslims are???
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2017, 03:49 PM
 
Location: Florida
76,971 posts, read 47,659,569 times
Reputation: 14806
Quote:
Originally Posted by earthlyfather View Post
Since it is meaningless, explain why the lower Cory’s blocked it. An answer other than liberal obstruction is BS.
Meaningless for the reasons I already listed, plus the fact that people from these countries, even Iran, can still travel to US. You can read the lower courts arguments on Google if you are not yet educated on them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2017, 03:50 PM
 
3,950 posts, read 3,305,536 times
Reputation: 1693
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheCityTheBridge View Post

Not at all. This remains in the hands of the 9th Circuit.



So . . . I take it you didn't bother reading the article, much less the court's order? This is a procedural order. While the lower court cases are pending, the lower court ruling is stayed--meaning the 3rd version of the EO (narrowed in several ways) is in effect pending SC decision.

I bet the ban will be kept on place....wanna bet??
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:54 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top