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.
As you take note, that was 16 years ago. Lot has changed since then.
The travel ban is for 2017, 2001.
Very logical.
What changed?
Do you know all the people in all the Middle Eastern countries in the world?
Did the Saudis suddenly change? Because I don't think they did.
Nothing is any more wrong with all of the Saudis than all of the people in any country on the ban list, but you can bet that a similar number of Saudis (or people who hold Saudi passports) are terrorists as there were in 2001.
It may be 16 years later, but all the "bad Muslims" didn't just up and move to Trump's target countries.
This isn't any different than what happened under Obama.
The US always plays nice with countries that'll give them oil.
The only difference now is that Trump is using this for personal, financial gain with his hotel deals in Saudi Arabia. AND, he's attacking a whole religion.
It's sickening.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
There goes Trump again, fulfilling his campaign promises. What do ya have to say to that, Trump haters?
OK Jeff, tell us what campaign promises Trump has already fulfilled. And Neill Gorsuch really doesn't count, since appointing a conservative justice when Trump has a cabinet full of drooling Republican groupies agreeing with everything he says and does is not an accomplishment. Without opposition, Gorsuch was a shoe-in for justice.
The fact that the conservative SC said they will hear the case indicates exactly that: they will hear that case. So tell us about all of Trump's victories for the working man. I'm dying to know.
What he called it is irrelevant...it did the same thing.
actually no it didn't.
Obamas as FAR narrower in scope, even under obamas ban we were admitting refugees, Obamas had nothing to do with religion, and was in response to a specific threat.
The thing that might doom it when heard is what they call it. But the SC is desperately trying to avoid having a hearing.
Do you know all the people in all the Middle Eastern countries in the world?
Did the Saudis suddenly change? Because I don't think they did.
Nothing is any more wrong with all of the Saudis than all of the people in any country on the ban list, but you can bet that a similar number of Saudis (or people who hold Saudi passports) are terrorists as there were in 2001.
It may be 16 years later, but all the "bad Muslims" didn't just up and move to Trump's target countries.
This isn't any different than what happened under Obama.
The US always plays nice with countries that'll give them oil.
The only difference now is that Trump is using this for personal, financial gain with his hotel deals in Saudi Arabia. AND, he's attacking a whole religion.
It's sickening.
You said yourself that the ruling today was fair. So why is it fair, but sickening? Can you have it both ways?
LOL, this thread is perfect for the Trump era. Complete, 100% lies. And even with the Trump lying tweet, where he completely fabricated what happened today. Just perfect!
The 9-0 decision was to HEAR the case. In other words, the SC can't wait to get its hand on this case; the same one that has been clear-cut unconstitutional from the beginning.
I think you would do well to go back and read today's court decision.
It was not 9-0 to(as you put it) hear the case.
It was 9-0 to allow the provisions of the EO to go forward with some restrictions.
I think you would do well to go back and read today's court decision.
It was not 9-0 to(as you put it) hear the case.
It was 9-0 to allow the provisions of the EO to go forward with some restrictions.
I think you would do well to go back and read today's court decision.
It was not 9-0 to(as you put it) hear the case.
It was 9-0 to allow the provisions of the EO to go forward with some restrictions.
Bob.
It's not some restrictions.. The ONLY one's that Scotus signed as not being covered at this point are Non-connected persons have ZERO connection to US Citizens. Recall Trump actually said ( Twit that he is) the second reformed EO was too lenient on his BAN!
But the whole point was to ban acceptance from the Countries he deemed as some sort of THREAT to National Security. How many since his original or amended EO have caused any threat??? NONE!!
The only thing that SCOTUS did was allow NON-Connected people to be banned.. Not Students, workers and extended family members of American Citizens!
He also outlined a 90 day ban in order to look into "Vetting Process" Sorry, but that 90 day window expired months ago!! Where the Heck is that investigation result??? Trump claims a lot of stuff, and it's all SMOKE and mirrors.. It mean NADDA! No investigation No looking into things has been done!
By the time of the SCOTUS hearing this case in October.. It will seem MOOT.. 10 months after "Urgent need for National Security" rationale would and already has all the appearance of FALSE claims/Narrative suggested by the POTUS!!
Trump, overstepped, yet claim Victory with this accepting of his appeal... yet the accepting spelled out the extent of his overreach!! Once again.. WH Lawyers have a lot of lawyers who need to do their homework!! Meanwhile... Trump best keep his big fat Twit mouth SHUT!!
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.
