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 Washington AG was the errand boy for Amazon and Microsoft. Since their pool of prospective employee lifeline was severed. Putting the country at risk for halting the ban because of prospective cheap labor for Amazon/Microsoft and other companies that abuse the H-1B/foreign lworkers is recklessness.
As I've noted in other threads. If Trump actually wants to do things he is going to have to quit being lazy, get his people in place and pass laws.
You may not be aware of this - but Presidents don't "pass laws" - they sign the Laws that Congress Passes.
Immigration Laws have not only been "passed", but they have been affirmed by the US Supreme Court.
There were two Court decisions today - but I only heard the Media talking about 1 of those cases. A Federal District Court Judge in Boston and a Federal District Court Judge in Seattle. Two Districts Courts on the same day or the same issue - with LINKS to both Decisions.
The Boston Judge listed over 25 Precedents from 3 Immigration Laws and the Constitution in Federal District and US Supreme Court rulings. He wrote a 20 page decision and Dismissed the Case, noting that the temporary stay that he had issued was "moot" because the Government has issued clarification and the rest of the "case" came under the Precedents noted in other cases and would FAIL.
The Seattle Judge listed 7 Precedents (none from Immigration Laws or Immigration cases) all Precedents were about "Standing" and "Irreparable Harm to the States". He ruled for a Temporary Restraining Order to be enacted Nationwide. He wrote a 7 page decision.
The Seattle Judge was not ruling on the Immigration issue at all - he ruled on Standing for the States of Minnesota & Washington and that basically President Trump is a Meanie. These 2 States will make their case on for an injunction by Feb 6 and a hearing will be set. The US Department of Justice will have a new US Attorney General in place by then ...... and the Seattle Case Ruling in hand with more than 2 dozen Precedents.
I can't help but wonder exactly WHO the DOJ sent to Seattle to argue the Government's case. I'm betting he/she won't be returning to Seattle.
The Boston’s judge’s thoughtful and deliberate decision follows the precedents, as the law compels. The Seattle judge’s decision tries to substitute for the legislative branches, which the law condemns. In the ultimate outcome of these decisions, memories of Super Bowls past will prove prescient: Like the Patriots, Boston will best Seattle once again
Jesus Nancy....the judge is a registered democrat.
Sorry. My misunderstanding. Too much going on. Too many Bushes too.
All I've been hearing is "Bush appointed judge.. .." and I swear I heard he was a Republican.
Not making excuses for my faux pas, but I might be thinking of the judge in Massachusetts who was appointed by Bush 41, but I'm not sure if he's a Republican or Democrat.
This Seattle judge needs to be put in his place. This country has no need for activist judges.
He gave no explanation of what language in the constitution was violated.
Sorry. My misunderstanding. Too much going on. Too many Bushes too.
All I've been hearing is "Bush appointed judge.. .." and I swear I heard he was a Republican.
Not making excuses for my faux pas, but I might be thinking of the judge in Massachusetts who was appointed by Bush 41, but I'm not sure if he's a Republican or Democrat.
Even without getting to the merits, there is a problem with standing here. Firstly, I don't know how the states that sued have standing (how in the world are the states injured here? No one is forcing them to spend any funds, etc., as a result of the order.). Second, courts have generally been skeptical of granting standing to affected parties who are not physically within the United States.
Even with its leftist bent, there's a good chance that this ruling gets overturned in the 9th Circuit. In any event, this ruling underscores the importance of getting Gorsuch approved to the Supreme Court.
I think standing comes about from the students of state run colleges being denied entry. I do not believe that will be an issue.
Trumps mistake was adding in people with green cards, and with valid visas. The smart thing would have simply been to say we arent issuing any new visas.
And Gorsuch might not rule on this the way you hope.
Is there a provision in the Constitution that I don't know of that grants judges powers over immigration?
Exactly. He should have the judge arrested for this uncosntituional expansion of judicial powers.
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.
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.
Too many Bushes too. 
