Trump travel ban blocked nationwide

[Skroe]

I thought all Trump was gonna do is "WIN WIN WIN"?

[Shadowmelded]

Windmills are bad because they are noisy and ugly...

"Fire hurts, fire bad!"

Slightly off-topic but he also legit claimed they kill birds and even sent a bunch of letters to our former First Minister (who was First Minister at the time) about it and calling him silly names and saying his reputation will be ruined. Dude's reviled over here. Hope he comes over ))

[Somewhatconcerned]

I kind of wish they would have reversed the ruling and allowed the ban to stand...here's why:

Unfortunately, when/if the next Orlando or San Bernardino happens (nevermind the fact that both were done by citizens), you just KNOW that Bannon will seize this opportunity to play to people's fears..."SEE, I TOLD YOU SO, YOU DIDN'T LET US PROTECT YOU!"

They will use it as a springboard to roll out even more extreme measures, that's when the REAL trampling of civil liberties begins. That's when they start targeting actual American citizens, all in the name of safety. The Constitution is only as good as the people who uphold it, and with people like Bannon and Conway in Trump's inner circle, I can see some sort of power grab, martial law, etc put into place. Just watch.

[Teebone]

It's what the Scottish told us to do:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pbTmXsfiYk

Just keep pissing him off.

Oh my god, this is the greatest thing I have ever watched =D

[drakensoul]

I kind of wish they would have reversed the ruling and allowed the ban to stand...here's why:

Unfortunately, when/if the next Orlando or San Bernardino happens (nevermind the fact that both were done by citizens), you just KNOW that Bannon will seize this opportunity to play to people's fears..."SEE, I TOLD YOU SO, YOU DIDN'T LET US PROTECT YOU!"

They will use it as a springboard to roll out even more extreme measures, that's when the REAL trampling of civil liberties begins. That's when they start targeting actual American citizens, all in the name of safety. The Constitution is only as good as the people who uphold it, and with people like Bannon and Conway in Trump's inner circle, I can see some sort of power grab, martial law, etc put into place. Just watch.

Since this ban wouldn't have prevented terror attacks anyway, the same argument could be made if it had been allowed to stay in effect.

"Even with the ban, look at what happened... clearly we need even more banning!"

It doesn't do any good. Either way eventually something will happen and there will be an "I told you so!" Even if it's 20 years after he's out of office.

So I'm happy with the ruling. Since you can't get away from Trump making Trumpisms, might as well do what's right.

OUR COUNTRY'S SECURITY AT STAKE!!!

Wasn't that what you were supposed to have your team of lawyers prove and justify? And couldn't/didn't?

[Wells]

The Administration really only have themselves to blame here. Their incompetence is what caused them to push out a poorly written EO that was then poorly implemented and had no plan to defend it in court.

[Teebone]

I kind of wish they would have reversed the ruling and allowed the ban to stand...here's why:

Unfortunately, when/if the next Orlando or San Bernardino happens (nevermind the fact that both were done by citizens), you just KNOW that Bannon will seize this opportunity to play to people's fears..."SEE, I TOLD YOU SO, YOU DIDN'T LET US PROTECT YOU!"

They will use it as a springboard to roll out even more extreme measures, that's when the REAL trampling of civil liberties begins. That's when they start targeting actual American citizens, all in the name of safety. The Constitution is only as good as the people who uphold it, and with people like Bannon and Conway in Trump's inner circle, I can see some sort of power grab, martial law, etc put into place. Just watch.

Yes, yes and MiBs will march from door to door with questionaires on proving citizenry. We've all seen the dystopian sci-fi future in its many incarnations. Just let us have this one, please? =)

[Breccia]

The Administration really only have themselves to blame here.

Well yeah...it's an Executive Order. Nobody else could be to blame.

[KrazyK923]

Well yeah...it's an Executive Order. Nobody else could be to blame.

Well duh it was obviously the activist judges' fault! Including the...conservative...?

[schwarzkopf]

Once again the courts have ruled against Trump and his travel ban.

Actually - that's not technically true. They ruled in favour of the earlier stay.

Basically the decision today is about the state of the ban whilst the legality is determined, not the legality or otherwise of the ban.

If I was POTUS - I'd just issue a new one without all the collateral damage the first one has, cancel the first one.

But no, the so called president has to spend huge resources trying to defend a poorly written mess just to defend his 'honour'.

[Edge-]

Well yeah...it's an Executive Order. Nobody else could be to blame.

I'm waiting for him to blame the "writers" of the EO, not realizing that he's still ultimately the one that signed it. And in doing so he unintentionally re-confirms that he doesn't know what the fuck it is he's signing.

[schwarzkopf]

The Administration really only have themselves to blame here. Their incompetence is what caused them to push out a poorly written EO that was then poorly implemented and had no plan to defend it in court.

Yep - all they needed to do up front, if they thought there was an issue from these countries is put a pause of issuing of visas to residents of those countries, but to respect the existing legal documents persons had.

Not cancel existing ones, not suspend green cards, and not suspect travel from citizens across the planet.

[Brubear]

I kind of wish they would have reversed the ruling and allowed the ban to stand...here's why:

Unfortunately, when/if the next Orlando or San Bernardino happens (nevermind the fact that both were done by citizens), you just KNOW that Bannon will seize this opportunity to play to people's fears..."SEE, I TOLD YOU SO, YOU DIDN'T LET US PROTECT YOU!"

They will use it as a springboard to roll out even more extreme measures, that's when the REAL trampling of civil liberties begins. That's when they start targeting actual American citizens, all in the name of safety. The Constitution is only as good as the people who uphold it, and with people like Bannon and Conway in Trump's inner circle, I can see some sort of power grab, martial law, etc put into place. Just watch.

That will happen either way, and I guarantee you that even if we have the ban (which is currently temporary) they would instead us it as a way to make it permanent and then do the same thing to trample civil liberties anyway.

The only difference is that, at least this way, people have a brief reprieve from the ban.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

inb4 Trumpers come and invade thread.

OT: I keep hearing people saying there's partisian bias on the judges part or whatever but.... I don't buy it.

[Belize]

inb4 Trumpers come and invade thread.

OT: I keep hearing people saying there's partisian bias on the judges part or whatever but.... I don't buy it.

Those darn biased conservative judges appointed by Bush. How dare they be so liberal!

[KrazyK923]

Those darn biased conservative judges appointed by Bush. How dare they be so liberal!

You joke but mark my words this will be said unsarcastically.

[Adam Jensen]

If she disagreed with the Constitutionality of the order her job is to resign from her position in protest and inform the President of her intentions if she intended to continue working in that position, not to do something to intentionally get herself fired.

No.

Her job is to defend the Constitution, NOT the President. She (the AG in general) is a check against the Executive and Legislative branches, not an enforcer of their will.

[Machismo]

The funniest part about it, is that the suspension of the ban will likely last long than the ban was supposed to last. That means after the 90 days, any future court can simply rule that the ban is no longer needed, since they had already passed the expiration date set forth by the administration. At that point, the only argument Trump's side can make, is that they are not able to properly review the process while it's actually running... which is a really poor argument to have to make. Otherwise, they will have to show their findings to the SC, and tell them that the travel ban of course needs to last longer, or that they were disingenuous about the intentions of the travel ban all along. In either case, this is going to be a huge uphill battle for the administration.

Freedom wins.

[Breccia]

Well duh it was obviously the activist judges' fault! Including the...conservative...?

Yeah, I was looking forward to reading the dissenting opinion...but there wasn't one.

Not sarcasm. Wanted to see both sides from a legal issue. Guess there wasn't one.

[Edge-]

Yeah, I was looking forward to reading the dissenting opinion...but there wasn't one.

Not sarcasm. Wanted to see both sides from a legal issue. Guess there wasn't one.

Given the bits I've seen of the ruling (need to read the full thing tonight), it's not surprising. By all accounts, it doesn't even seem like the government put forth an argument beyond, "But he's the president."