Travel Ban 3: Return of the Judges

[Kiri]

Personally, I hope he cuts of ALL IMMIGRATION, just to give the Liberals - and these worthless "judges" - the middle finger (which is exactly what Trump voters did last November.)

As per usual, hurting the other 'team' is more important than the damage it would cause to other people. Once upon a time, a government was supposed to do the best for all its people, but apparently it has been replaced by a sports competition at some point during the past decades.

[-Nurot]

Liberals only care about laws when it suits their own needs, besides that laws be damn. This is why they protest against police and support criminals.

Yet, conservatives, literally, says things like: Why have laws when criminals don't follow them?

Personally, I hope he cuts of ALL IMMIGRATION, just to give the Liberals - and these worthless "judges" - the middle finger (which is exactly what Trump voters did last November.)

This only what some Trump voters did. The deplorable ones. You know the worthless imbeciles who don't have a clue as to what is going on in the world, no less here.

[Breccia]

And wasn't this ban not supposed to just tide people over until better vetting methods were implemented?

It was, yes. And the new travel ban is based on those countries who refused to cooperate, with the vetting, that was supposed to be set up during the ban, which OH GOD INCEPTION

[The Penguin]

If you want to stop "activist" judges stop proposing unconstitutional laws

Then stop trying to change laws that have been in existence for generations to fit a radical ideology to 'fundamentally transform America'.

[Blur4stuff]

I need to check my calendar real quick and see if 90 days have passed since the original travel ban.

[Healing Rain]

That Hawaiian "judge" is just anti-Trump. Otherwise he would have blocked Obamacare's tyrannical individual mandate.

[Sky High]

That Hawaiian "judge" is just anti-Trump. Otherwise he would have blocked Obamacare's tyrannical individual mandate.

I mean, shit posting is fine and all but, for god sake at least read the thread title.

[fengosa]

Then stop trying to change laws that have been in existence for generations to fit a radical ideology to 'fundamentally transform America'.

That's not how it works. Laws can be introduced or changed at any time. There's an entire branch of government dedicated to doing so.

I assume the radical agenda you speak of refers to things like health care reform and gay marriage which were held up by SCOTUS.

You need to rethink what a fundamental change in America is. It's a poor argument when the lawmakers and judges aren't on your side.

[Arvei]

But THE constitution does not RANDOMLY use all caps for some words so it does not count! Exclamation MARK!

You forgot a random "LOL --" somewhere in that post. He must be a noisy neighbor.

[Orange Joe]

Derrick Watson will soon be impeached and removed from the bench.

This case needs to go directly to the SCOTUS. It is time to clarify the Executive Branch's power, once and for all, so that the advocacy emanating from judges like Watson is completely halted.

The POTUS can SOLELY determine - based on ANY criteria he decides - who is allowed into this country. That power is granted to him by US Code 1182. This is a black and white issue. there is NO gray here. If he wants to specifically ban Muslims he is allowed to, whether YOU like it or not. That is the law. Period.

So how was daca unconstitutional again?

[primalmatter]

This is going to be fashioned into a powerful weapon come reelection... Look at what I tried to do but they ignored the will of the people to over ride me...

[Fugus]

This is going to be fashioned into a powerful weapon come reelection... Look at what I tried to do but they ignored the will of the people to over ride me...

Following him would be ignoring the will of the people. By the will of the people he lost the election and only got picked because the electoral college disenfranchises voters in all states big and small.

Even on the specific issues, his stances go against the will of the people.

[Deleted]

So how was daca unconstitutional again?

Maybe you should try understanding the US Government - there are 3 branches: Executive, Legislative, and Judicial.

The Executive branch has the power to determine who gets into the country.

The Legislative has the power to make the rules that govern them once they are here.

The Executive does NOT get to usurp the powers of the Legislative - which is why DACA was unconstitutional.

[primalmatter]

Following him would be ignoring the will of the people. By the will of the people he lost the election and only got picked because the electoral college disenfranchises voters in all states big and small.

Even on the specific issues, his stances go against the will of the people.

Yet we will use the same system again.

[Orange Joe]

Maybe you should try understanding the US Government - there are 3 branches: Executive, Legislative, and Judicial.

The Executive branch has the power to determine who gets into the country.

The Legislative has the power to make the rules that govern them once they are here.

The Executive does NOT get to usurp the powers of the Legislative - which is why DACA was unconstitutional.

LEt me repeat your own words again.

The POTUS can SOLELY determine - based on ANY criteria he decides - who is allowed into this country.

Please explain how daca is unconstitutional while the travel ban isn't.

[Deleted]

LEt me repeat your own words again.



Please explain how daca is unconstitutional while the travel ban isn't.

I already explained - CLEARLY, I can't help it that you cannot discern the difference.

[Fugus]

Yet we will use the same system again.

Yeah, sucks too. It has failed in 2 out of the past 5 elections but neither side wants to change it as it makes sure only the big 2 ever stand a chance.

Needs to be removed entirely and the whole thing taken to the popular vote using a ranked voting method, or at the least force the college voters to vote according to the popular votes of the states with super delegates banned.

One of those things that are broken by design and they don't want to fix it because both parties like locking out any other options.

[Felya]

I already explained - CLEARLY, I can't help it that you cannot discern the difference.

Your explanation contradicts your assertion about Trump. Everyone understand you hate Obama for doing, the problem people have is your reaction to Trump doing it.

[fengosa]

I already explained - CLEARLY, I can't help it that you cannot discern the difference.

The difference is you're holding different standards for Trump than you holding for Obama.

[PACOX]

Maybe you should try understanding the US Government - there are 3 branches: Executive, Legislative, and Judicial.

The Executive branch has the power to determine who gets into the country.

The Legislative has the power to make the rules that govern them once they are here.

The Executive does NOT get to usurp the powers of the Legislative - which is why DACA was unconstitutional.

* The following is null and void if everyone belongs to the same party.