This time in Hawaii based on the 1st Amendment in the 9th Circuit again.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/15/u...ravel-ban.html
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/a...judge-j0bk602s
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...=.75f1e4348e1b
This time in Hawaii based on the 1st Amendment in the 9th Circuit again.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/15/u...ravel-ban.html
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/a...judge-j0bk602s
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...=.75f1e4348e1b
Last edited by Orbitus; 2017-03-16 at 12:52 AM. Reason: Added another source
I look forward to Trump's impotent rage on this matter.
Yes and I think the judge cited a CNN interview from a year ago as evidence in his judgement. Alrighty then.
3rd times the charm, right boys?
Oh dis gon be gud.
Whoever that Dimocrat "judge" is should be impeached.
https://twitter.com/CNN/status/842172268830724096
Trump says new travel ban is "watered down," adds, "I think we ought to go back to the first one and go all the way"
Also of note: American Muslims would be "confused, hurt, and sad" because of the EO (page 25). This was a factor, apparently. And the tourism industry could be affected. These are compelling arguments actually.
Full text of the judgement: http://www.politico.com/f/?id=000001...b-d5e934210000
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning.
-Kujako-
TLDR: Trump doesn't get to proclaim his intent to institute a Muslim ban from every rooftop during the campaign, then claim his ban isn't discriminatory afterwards. From what I saw at least.
Who's ready for Round 2 of the Court of Appeals?
This brings me much joy. XD Trump's own words used against him. If only we could do this more often with politicians.
So now we're going to go through another "this isn't a Muslim ban, we never said it was a Muslim ban!!" shit show again. Accept now it's "we left Iraq off the list!! So it isn't a Muslim ban since we took off one Muslim country!!"