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.
You may be right.
However, the law, as stated, is what we have to deal with at the present time. According to that law (again, 8 USC 1182) the President has every right to issue a proclamation restricting immigration by any people or class of people whenever he thinks it is necessary for the protection of the security of the United States. There is no provision in the law for a review of the Presidential Proclamation by anybody.
The Seattle judge was, and is, according to the law, WRONG! The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals was and is WRONG, according to the law.
The judge in Seattle wasn't the only judge that halted the ban, several others across the country other than the Boston judge. Yes presidents have wide jurisdiction on immigration but it's usually based on some concrete and specific threat, even if Trump based this ban on some factual threat it was poorly executed.
I wouldn't be so sure about the court ruling, there was a rather large impact on the nation, I will leave this one to the judges but I don't believe his power is absolute.
It also fails because foreigners are not protected by our Constitution.
They can be excluded by the president for any reason -- or for no reason.
The law is very clear on that.
And other presidents -- including Obama -- have done the very same thing.
As I said, rotten judges....this one should be disbarred and put on a terrorist watch list and the no fly list.
He clearly wants terrorists to come to this country to attack innocent American men, women and children.
BTW, Christians are being slaughtered by Muslims in the countries Trump listed, and the anti-Trumps (including this rotten judge) are just fine with that.
That shows what kind of people they are.
It may as well have stated Christian since they are the minorities in those countries.
The presidents powers are not immune from review by the courts, it's not just one judge by the way, several judges throughout the country have shut down the ban with the exception of the Boston judge.
If it was so clear cut, I would have expected the 9th district to have lifted the ban when asked for a emergency motion. That being said, I suspect it will be resolved here in a day or so at the circuit level, and then the supreme court. Until then, its all just blah blah blah.
It is clear cut, politics are at play here with progressive judges.
It may as well have stated Christian since they are the minorities in those countries.
The presidents powers are not immune from review by the courts, it's not just one judge by the way, several judges throughout the country have shut down the ban with the exception of the Boston judge.
This is not an answer. It's true that the president's power must be within the law. In the case, even a layman would agree that the president is within its power to instate the ban.
They have until 3PM today to file briefs with the Appeals Court but this is going to drag on for some time, meanwhile visa holders will be petrified to leave. This will probably go to the supreme court, fairly rapidly because of the impact.
If it goes to the SCOTUS before they have a 9th justice is sworn in, the decision of the appellate court will stand.
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.
