Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Current Events

Current Events Current Events Forum - Latest political news and events


Thanks Tree4Thanks
  • 1 Post By foundit66
  • 2 Post By Jimmyb
  • 1 Post By tristanrobin
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old June 26th, 2017, 07:21 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Cerritos
Posts: 220
SCOTUS Reviews the Trump Travel Ban Case

The Supreme Court announced today that it plans to review the case over President Trump's travel ban.

The announcement came today, on the final day of the court's term. The court will take up the case in October.

Trump's executive order, titled "Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States" was issued in March. It would ban for 90 days entry into the U.S. of people from six predominantly Muslim countries and suspend for 120 days acceptance into the U.S. of refugees from anywhere in the world.

Such an action requires five of the nine justices to agree to temporarily stay the lower-court injunctions so that the executive order can go into effect and four to vote to take up the case when the court convenes again in October.

Supreme Court allows parts of Trump travel ban to take effect - ABC News

Sent from my LG-K330 using Tapatalk
tbbyolumbatobby is offline  
Old June 26th, 2017, 07:25 AM   #2
Spud
 
foundit66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: California
Posts: 5,714
Post

Trump played himself on this issue by announcing a Muslim ban during his campaign.
Blatantly unconstitutional.

It would be like Jeff Sessions proclaiming he would ban blacks from Queens.
And then getting in office and refusing entry to anybody from Harlem.
Doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure that situation out...
Thanks from tbbyolumbatobby
foundit66 is offline  
Old June 26th, 2017, 07:27 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: In the mind of liberal hippies
Posts: 38,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
Trump played himself on this issue by announcing a Muslim ban during his campaign.
Blatantly unconstitutional.

It would be like Jeff Sessions proclaiming he would ban blacks from Queens.
And then getting in office and refusing entry to anybody from Harlem.
Doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure that situation out...
What part of the Constitution makes it unconstitutional?
Jimmyb is offline  
Old June 26th, 2017, 07:31 AM   #4
Spud
 
foundit66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: California
Posts: 5,714
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmyb View Post
What part of the Constitution makes it unconstitutional?
I've got limited bandwidth to explain things to you this morning, so can you try reviewing some of the various court rulings against Trump to 'splain it to yourself?

Thanks!
foundit66 is offline  
Old June 26th, 2017, 07:32 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: In the mind of liberal hippies
Posts: 38,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
I've got limited bandwidth to explain things to you this morning, so can you try reviewing some of the various court rulings against Trump to 'splain it to yourself?

Thanks!
It would have taken less bandwidth to just say you cannot back up your statement.
Thanks from Sabcat and username
Jimmyb is offline  
Old June 26th, 2017, 09:15 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
tristanrobin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: New Haven, CT
Posts: 21,802
SCOTUS agreed with Trump. Allowed most of executive order to stand.
Thanks from McCoy
tristanrobin is offline  
Old June 26th, 2017, 09:35 AM   #7
Banned
 
League of Justice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Mood Indigo
Posts: 296
Unanimous Court reinstates most of the travel ban.

Only a narrow group may have a chance on the appeal to be heard in October, and the Court laid down some strict language about that.

The ban is either 90 or 120 days, then new policy on vetting will be implemented. So the odds are high that by the time the hearing in front of the Court arrives it may be moot.


Too bad though that it was not, as three Justices agreed, a complete implementation.

Quote:
The justices therefore upheld the lower courts’ orders blocking enforcement of the ban with regard to the named plaintiffs and others like them – people who “have a credible claim” of a genuine relationship with someone or an institution in the United States. When that relationship is with an individual, the court made clear, it must be a close family member. And when the relationship is with an institution, the relationship must also be a genuine one, rather than one created just to get around the travel ban.

Justice Clarence Thomas filed a separate opinion, which was joined by Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch. They would have allowed the government to reinstate the ban for all travelers from the six affected countries, regardless of any personal connection that those travelers might have with the United States. Thomas complained that today’s order could prove “unworkable,” requiring government officials to try to figure out whether would-be travelers have enough of an connection to the United States to come here, and could “invite a flood of litigation.”
http://www.scotusblog.com/2017/06/ju...t/#more-257670

IDK why this "personal connection" trumps POTUS and Congressional acts. Perhaps a bone by the other six to the lower courts foolishness that itself will get tossed. There is no basis in law for a "personal connection" to grant automatic entry into the nation.

Anyway, as pointed out above, it may be moot by the time the hearing rolls around.

Last edited by League of Justice; June 26th, 2017 at 09:49 AM.
League of Justice is offline  
Old June 26th, 2017, 09:51 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
Trump played himself on this issue by announcing a Muslim ban during his campaign.
Blatantly unconstitutional.

It would be like Jeff Sessions proclaiming he would ban blacks from Queens.
And then getting in office and refusing entry to anybody from Harlem.
Doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure that situation out...
Muslims prefer terrorism over Nazism or Racism so therefore Trump wanted to ban muslim in begin of 17. Three month then clear. Of course, nationalist and current president Trump wanted to Protect White nationalist how supporting him in election 16.


Last edited by McCoy; June 26th, 2017 at 09:52 AM. Reason: Just A little
McCoy is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Current Events

Tags
ban, case, reviews, scotus, travel, trump



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Judge rules against Trump in Trump University case Nwolfe35 Politicians 1 August 2nd, 2016 08:13 PM
SCOTUS Declines Illinois Assault Weapons Ban Case In 7-2 Vote skews13 Current Events 30 December 8th, 2015 07:16 PM
Who's Crazier The Plaintiffs In The Obamacare Case Or SCOTUS For Hearing It? skews13 Current Events 3 February 10th, 2015 09:26 AM
Victor In NSA Case Seeks SCOTUS Review excalibur Current Events 5 February 3rd, 2014 08:21 PM
SCOTUS refuses to hear gay book case tristanrobin Gay and Lesbian Rights 16 October 17th, 2008 02:31 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.