I do not think Trump will get anywhere with his blatant violations of American and Constitutional values. He will have an incredibly tough 3.9 years ahead of him.
Actually we should start a pool on how many hours until this judge's ruling will be overturned. Even CNN is stating it is not likely to hold.
Game on...and even if it gets overturned it will again be challenged up higher. As said it will most likely be deliberated in Supreme Court at some point.
True. However I give this particular ruling about 50 hours until it is set aside and that is only due to it being a weekend.
fair. I am also interested in the further developments and it is anybody's guess at this point how this will all go down. Great drama. By the way, despite some of my troll posts (which I at times enjoy purely for entertainment purpose), I do acknowledge the need to stronger vet immigrants and visa applicants. Not just in the US but in Europe as well. Nothing wrong with that. What I disagree with is a blanket ban on all people of a certain country, banning all refugees (if Obama did then I disagree with him as well), and implementing such vetting in a very poor way as has been done. Let's chalk it up to the previous administration's poor handling of this issue. Let's give Trump's guys 90 or 120 days or however long they need and then we shall see how he gets the vetting to work out so much better as he claims. I am not against giving this man a chance. I think in the heat of the argument a lot of guys on this forum misjudge me for some US hater. I am not. I have lived in the US and most of the people have been incredibly hospitable and friendly to me. But I am also a critical person by nature. I am equally critical of other countries and policies, something I have clearly expressed about China for example. I am ok and happy to explain and walk back some of my rhetoric to people who can talk in a reasonable and normal way with others, and you seem to be such person. There are others on this site whose every single word is garbage and outright shit and I simply cannot take such person seriously.
Sleepy1 (Zzzzzz...) talks about Constitutional values like out of nowhere courts are taking up the issue because Trump's actions are so egregious. Laughable, it's likely Soros having multiple teams of lawyers prepped with "victims" (illegals) filing suits in each jurisdiction each time a different Federal Court rules. It's a matter of National Security and since National Security means nothing to Globalist Leftist Socialist Elites it's time for DOJ to consider building cases for Treason against some of their ilk if/when the money trail is found.
'Muslim ban' injunction is a judicial coup against President Trump By Ed Straker Federal district judge James Robart of Seattle ordered a complete, nationwide temporary restraining order against President Trump's temporary ban on visitors from seven Middle Eastern countries. If you read the ruling, as I have, you can see that this is clearly unconstitutional on its face, and constitutes a judicial coup against President Trump and the executive branch. 1) The standards for granting a temporary restraining order are quite high. The plaintiff must show that he is likely to succeed on the merits and will suffer irreparable harm if the injunction is not granted. Here the people from the excluded countries cannot show irreparable harm – only that their entry to the United States will be delayed. And they are unlikely to succeed on the merits, because the president has no obligation to let foreigners into the country. On the contrary, there may be irreparable harm if the temporary travel ban is lifted, as terrorists may enter the country and kill people. 2) By the way, the plaintiffs here aren't even the people from the excluded countries. They are the states of Washington and Minnesota, who claim that their citizens will be harmed if the temporary ban is not lifted. Perhaps Microsoft is being deprived of some cheap labor. It's a flimsy argument at best. This ruling has no substantial effect on states' residents, contrary to what Judge Robart has said. .......... Judge Robart, who was appointed by George W. Bush (should we be surprised or not?), has clearly usurped his authority. The case clearly has no plaintiffs with standing or any kind of validity. At most, Judge Robart should have stayed his decision pending appeal to circuit courts. His radical injunction smacks of a judicial coup, of a single federal district judge asserting his authority over the entire executive branch. His arguments for doing so are unconstitutional, as is his manner of issuing the order. We are living in a time when judicial ayatollahs are usurping the power of our elected officials, and it is very much like a judicial coup. more at http://mowser.com/web.php?raw=true&..._a_judicial_coup_against_president_trump.html