Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner
1 - 20 of 51 Posts

·
I'm kind of a big deal
Joined
·
5,243 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
http://nypost.com/2017/02/09/federal-appeals-court-rules-against-trumps-travel-ban/

A federal appeals court on Thursday unanimously upheld a judge’s order that slammed the brakes on President Trump’s temporary refugee and immigration ban.

The stunning 3-0 ruling by the 9th Circuit court of Appeals in San Francisco means the travel ban â€" which caused chaos and massive protests at airports across the USâ€" won’t take effect.

The president responded with a tweet, promising to challenge the ruling.
 

·
I'm kind of a big deal
Joined
·
5,243 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·

·
I'm kind of a big deal
Joined
·
5,243 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Later, Assad intimated that water is indeed wet.
 

·
Member Georgia Carry
Joined
·
11,904 Posts
Funny how the courts can jump on something and give a ruling in a few days if political correctness is on the line, but it if involves restoring our Second Amendment Rights, they take years to even give it a hearing and years past that to make a ruling - usually against us.

Defense of our country is within President Trump's authority. He has the military to enforce his immigration order regardless of what the 9th Circuit says.
 

·
NRA Instructor
Joined
·
3,391 Posts
He can also stop the issuing of visas. Those already issued are good to go if they were not destroyed at the time the ban was in effect. Just don't issue any. there is no law that requires the USA to accept refugees. Visas are at the discretion of the State Department.
 

·
Man of Myth and Legend
Joined
·
15,156 Posts
A nickel says Tillerson has already got that in the works.

Nemo
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
69,784 Posts
Ninth Circuit says:

Arizona has not standing to challenge Obama EO on immigration.

Washington has standing to challenge Trump EO on immigration.​
 

·
I'm kind of a big deal
Joined
·
5,243 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Most people don't realize that no one has ruled on the actual EO. The court issued a stay because the complainants may (or probably) have a case, when the Trump admin appealed, the ninth circuit should have sent it back to the previous court to make an actual ruling. That's my extremely non-lawyerly understanding anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,920 Posts
nope, not may or probably have a case but rather pre-judged as "likely to win"
 

·
Member Georgia Carry
Joined
·
11,904 Posts
Disband the 9th Circuit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
841 Posts
The old saying goes something like............if you lose at the 9th Circuit, then you have actually won.

Charles Cooke at National Review said something like 80% of the 9th Circuit's rulings get overturned at SCOTUS.

.....
If this is true, then they should be impeached.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,204 Posts
Charles Cooke at National Review said something like 80% of the 9th Circuit's rulings get overturned at SCOTUS.
What makes it to the SCOTUS that is. What BS gets to stand when the SCOTUS doesn't hear a case?
 

·
Member Georgia Carry
Joined
·
11,904 Posts
If the 9th's rulings are consistently over-turned, it seems to me they are doing their best to usurp Constitutional Law.

They should be impeached based on this.
 

·
NRA Instructor
Joined
·
3,391 Posts
If the 9th's rulings are consistently over-turned, it seems to me they are doing their best to usurp Constitutional Law.

They should be impeached based on this.
I made this statement 20+ years ago. This court doesn't seem to change no matter who appoints the jurist. The problem is no honest judge will accept a position on this court. You can call out 50 judges and then have to settle for the bottom of the pit where all the muck grows because none of the 50 would consider it.
 

·
I'm kind of a big deal
Joined
·
5,243 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
nope, not may or probably have a case but rather pre-judged as "likely to win"
Correct, that is more accurate. I was going off of memory. My point is that the EO itself has not been ruled on in court yet.

1. The petitioners have met their burden of establishing a strong likelihood of success in establishing that the detention and/or removal of the petioners and others similarly situated would violate their rights to Due Process and Equal Protection as guaranteed by the United States Constitution;
https://aclum.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/6-TRO-Jan-29-2017.pdf

If I'm not mistaken, the petitioners are green card holders. I think an EO that is focused on the refugees and other non-green card holders would likely be harder to stop.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,809 Posts
Correct, that is more accurate. I was going off of memory. My point is that the EO itself has not been ruled on in court yet.

https://aclum.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/6-TRO-Jan-29-2017.pdf

If I'm not mistaken, the petitioners are green card holders. I think an EO that is focused on the refugees and other non-green card holders would likely be harder to stop.
Does the 1st Amendment (or any amendment) apply to non-US citizens? I know that SCOTUS had a ruling somewhere that people within the US met the definition of "people" in terms of the constitution and therefore have constitutional protections, but they also had a ruling (something v. Kim as I recall) that those here illegally are not afforded the same protections (I think the ruling was related to detention prior to deportation) and certainly someone that isn't here at all (and not a citizen) wouldn't have those rights. I guess I'm just unclear on how the EO applies to non US citizens....
 
1 - 20 of 51 Posts
Top