Supreme Court Upholds Trump Travel Ban

[GetTheseHands]

Pathetic answers. They have had TWO years to have a plan that could have been implemented today after the SC ruling and hit the ground running. They had two years that could have devised a plan and two years to research the legality of it, but they've done zero.

They haven't worked on one at all. So will we have one in 90 days?

It could have been done two years like planned if it wasn't for screeching liberals and activist judges...See I can play this game too

 

[BKMMAFAN]

Full decision here:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/17-965_h315.pdf

5-4.

The dissent of Sotomayor/Ginsburg in this case is an embarrassment to our nation. They cite Trump's stump speeches at length and attempt to prove that he had unconstitutional motivations for the executive order. These people are operating far outside of a rules-based framework. Their job is is to evaluate whether the policy itself violated the Constitution or other federal law, not whether Trump's motivations were worthy of criticism.

Was it outside our rule-based framework for the majority in the Masterpiece cake case to consider statements by state officials that purported to show religious animus? The majority in Masterpiece considered statements by Colorado state officials before determining those officials acted without the neutrality that the Free Exercise Clause requires.

Moreover, by surprisingly overruling Korematsu, the majority made it patently clear that intent can matter when it comes to Constitutionality of policy directives. Here, the fact that a system of waivers and exemptions was established, coupled with the fact that all countries with large Muslim populations weren't included, was enough for the Court to uphold Trump's order on rational basis scrutiny.

 

[The Prophet]

The constitution doesn't need to be rewritten, it needs to be reread.

Activist judges take another L

exactly.

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

It could have been done two years like planned if it wasn't for screeching liberals and activist judges...See I can play this game too

You REALLY think they couldn't have devised an amazing vetting program in two years? lol great spin bruh.

Just admit there was never going to be a new vetting program. I predict in 90 days they will try to extend the ban indefinitely because there won't be a vetting program.

How will you feel if the ban expires, then there is still no vetting program?

 

[Seano]

When your president looks to rule the country via racism expect resistance.

Keep on blowing that dog whistle.

 

[The Prophet]

struck down by incompetent liberal judges, whats the point?

correct.

 

[The Prophet]

The 9th circuit judges all need to be impeached, they are a goddamn joke

accurate.

 

[GetTheseHands]

I wish there was some review process if over X percent of your rulings get overturned by a higher court

Judges are not exempt from impeachment and the 9th circuit needs to be cleansed.

 

[bushman505]

When your president looks to rule the country via racism expect resistance.

Do we really need to point out again that Islam is not a race???

It’s a religion. I repeat Islam is not a race, it’s a religion.

 

[The Prophet]

Judges are not exempt from impeachment and the 9th circuit needs to be.

agrees.

 

[GetTheseHands]

No dog whistle on either side here. Trump is a racist making racist decisions (clearly) and we are calling him a racist.

Ok Don Lemon...

 

[Seano]

Congrats on your 6 month travel ban to implement an extreme vetting plan two years later without the extreme vetting plan.

#winning

On behalf of conservatives, I accept your concession that your side was wrong again. It must be getting easier, considering how often it happens lately.

 

[Rational Poster]

On behalf of conservatives, I accept your concession that your side was wrong again. It must be getting easier, considering how often it happens lately.

Wrong about what?

Sorry I just have a memory.

The reason given for the ban was that it was to be temporary to implement a vetting program after 6 months.

It's been two years.

 

[cincymma79]

I for one was desperately hoping for more people from those countries. I are disappoint

 

[waiguoren]

You seem to be rather naive as to the complexity of legal language

Note for future reference: starting your response with a personal attack is not usually conducive to productive discussion.

If Trump gets it in his head, tomorrow, that people from Canada constitute a threat due to his trade war can he, unilaterally and without reasoning, ban Canadians from entering?

He certainly can. The Immigration and Nationality Acts of 1952 and 1965 demand that he not be denied this power.

For A, what constitutes a presidential finding? Is it a whim, or does it require reasoning, context, and even a superficial attempt to explain the why and how?

One could perform originalist analysis on the sponsors of the 1952 legislation to determine if those sponsors intended "finding" to be anything tangible. My assumption (and I'll wager it's correct), is that no such expectation can be documented. If Congress wanted a higher standard, it had to ability to impose it.

Must it be considered in light of other existing laws and statutes, and must there be any explanation whatsoever of the expected benefit?

It should be considered in light of other statutes, but Ginsburg/Sotomayor's dissent and the plaintiffs produced no statutes that contradict the authority mentioned above.

As for your second question: no. Not unless you can point me to a statute that requires such an explanation.

You present this federal law as if it is read, understood, and that's that. That's not how the law works.

That's how the law works in the absence of contradictory precedent/statutes.

 

[*Z*]

The travel ban is still a thing?

 

[bushman505]

Yawn.

Yeah that’s what I thought too “yawn”’when you started crying racism....about a religion.

 

[BudKing8806]

When your president looks to rule the country via racism expect resistance.

And when the resistance gets out of hand, expect to be checked.

 

[Seaside]

lol at africa, south asia, and the middle east. But Japan? also that right gringos you might get fucked up if you come to ecuador, colombia or venezuela! but not seeing brazil on there blows my mind or mexico.

 

[bushman505]

The travel ban is still a thing?

Luckily, yes.