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.
Not quite again no precedent over anything. We had what you are talking about in the 1800s and it was colossal failure.
Districts<Circuits<SCOTUS.
It is persuasive however. But nothing stops your local D.C. From saying otherwise.
What the court orders has nothing to do with it because they don't have jurisdiction over you. It why every state has their own D.C.
But does not the original Federal ruling hold on a nationwide basis UNTIL your local DC says otherwise? Then it's battled to the Supreme Court? Which is what is happening here - Washington trumps Massachusetts *because* it's written more "broadly" (which I take to mean covers or addresses an issue not in the Massachusetts ruling and thus is new case law) - making the Washington decision applicable on a nationwide basis?
Quote:
In a conference call at around 9 p.m. EST (0200 GMT), the U.S. agency told airlines to operate just as they had before the order, which temporarily had stopped refugees and nationals from seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States. Individuals from those states who have proper visas can now board U.S.-bound flights, and airlines are working to update their websites to reflect the change, said the official, who was not authorized to speak publicly In a statement, the state department said it did not immediately know how to comply. “We are working closely with the Dept of Homeland Security and our legal teams to determine how this affects our operations.” A DHS spokeswoman said that the agency would not comment: “As a matter of policy, we do not comment on pending litigation.”
Oh here's another source that did not seem to be on the web until a few minutes ago:
Quote:
The US customs and border protection agency has reportedly told airlines to resume operation as normal – that is, as if the Trump travel ban order never existed. But you could be forgiven for being confused by the statement on its website, which gives information the executive order “Protecting the National from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States”. There doesn’t seem to be any information on the court ruling in Seattle which has put a nation-wide stop on Trump’s ban.
The court won't really be stacked in Trump's favor unless a liberal justice is replaced. Justice Kennedy is still the swing vote and the other conservative justices may not agree with Trump either.
All four liberal justices currently on the bench average 78 years of age. There is a good chance the court can swing to a conservative view in the next four to eight years.
Citing the role of the Supreme Court doesn't explain how a federal judge in the Western District of Washington has jurisdiction to issue a nationwide injunction.
Legally he does and has! I'm sorry for the little boy burned in Iraq that is at Shriners hospital separated from parents because of the ban,,, and I'm gathering the CBP. " Union"guy was all in trumps face to get this done. Well when we as a govt do things, they should be thought out! Darn the congress takes a year to do a budget, but potus stop thousands of people traveling in one day ?? If it were trumps business , he'd fire them! I'm sure the airlines are seething. What a mess! Now DOS is reissuing those visa and travel authorizations . Wondering if the airlines will honor backdated tickets ???
But does not the original Federal ruling hold on a nationwide basis UNTIL your local DC says otherwise? Then it's battled to the Supreme Court? Which is what is happening here - Washington trumps Massachusetts *because* it's written more "broadly" (which I take to mean covers or addresses an issue not in the Massachusetts ruling and thus is new case law) - making the Washington decision applicable on a nationwide basis?
No, it doesn't affect you until you're bound. Either through your own district or circuit.
It's what's called persuasive authority but isn't binding on your jurisdiction.
Imagine if every ruling in AZ affected citizens in NY until NY said otherwise.
Well it's off to bed for me though I'll bet there are plenty of DOJ attorneys who will be working all night long. And plenty of folks in the 7 covered countries who are trying to board planes to enter the US before the next go-round.
The United States has the right to decide who is admitted into this country. We do not have "open borders." We can ban whoever we want.
Exactly, and wanting otherwise is going against the safety of our country. I hope the original ban continues.
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.
