Trump is limited... Good news.

Jarod said:
Trumps Tweet, (comma splice not withstanding) was good news for those of us who feared he would not follow the rule of law.

Many of Trumps comments and personality traits led me to believe he was a tyrant who knew no bounds. He acts like he does not care about anything or anyone who disagrees with him and will not respect any such limits on him actions.

However his Tweet last night was good news.

"SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"


That seemingly defiant tweet is a subtle acknowledgement of the rule of law and authority of the Court. Trump could have said, "The security of our nation is at stake" and then instructed his departments to enforce the ban anyway. We would be facing Constitutional crisis and a Coup D'etat, as I have previously mentioned in other threads.

In that one Tweet, grammar aside, Trump recognized and reaffirmed the authority of the Court even when the Nations security is at stake. I dont know if that was his intention, but even so, I am happy with the result.
Click to expand...

He can just re-issue the EO and make sure it ONLY applies to those who have NEVER come here before. That includes 99% of those countries targeted. There could be no lawsuit as people outside this country who have never come to this country would have ZERO standing and could not sue.

Problem solved.
 
anatta said:
maybe if the Dem's didn't obstruct his AG, they would have known to exempt green cards?
Which is really all that is wrong with the XO -the crap about "Muslim ban" notwithstanding

and no he cannot just ignore the courts!
Click to expand...


Agree with the first statement and yes he can ignore the courts. The only force of law they have is that people have allowed themselves to be bullied by the courts. But there proclamations/rulings have no force of law. They cannot enforce their rulings
 
Teflon Don said:
Agree with the first statement and yes he can ignore the courts. The only force of law they have is that people have allowed themselves to be bullied by the courts. But there proclamations/rulings have no force of law. They cannot enforce their rulings
Click to expand...
Congress would start impeachment
 
Jarod said:
I remember during the campaign when I said a Muslim ban would be unconstitutional, people here argued.

This is a hugely watered down version of what was first proposed and we are facing serious questions as to if it is Constitutional.
Click to expand...

So Counselor, I'm just curious....what is your personal opinion of a District Court that has a record of being overturned by the Supreme

Court in over 80% of their decisions .... thats quite a record. !

.... one or the other obviously isn't getting it right....one or the other don't know wtf their doing....

you think its the SC that gets it wrong or the 9th Dist. Clowns ?
 
NOVA said:
The 9th Dist. Circus decisions have been overturned over 80% of the time and there is no reason to think this decision will be different....

so rejoice while you can.....

He who laughs last, laughs best....
Click to expand...

You are so dumb if you think this thread is about if he wins or not.
 
anatta said:
maybe if the Dem's didn't obstruct his AG, they would have known to exempt green cards?
Which is really all that is wrong with the XO -the crap about "Muslim ban" notwithstanding

and no he cannot just ignore the courts!
Click to expand...

You don't need an Attorney General to know you should have exempted green card holders.
 
Teflon Don said:
He can just re-issue the EO and make sure it ONLY applies to those who have NEVER come here before. That includes 99% of those countries targeted. There could be no lawsuit as people outside this country who have never come to this country would have ZERO standing and could not sue.

Problem solved.
Click to expand...

Yup, but he wont. This is about the fight, not actually making America safer.
 
Teflon Don said:
Agree with the first statement and yes he can ignore the courts. The only force of law they have is that people have allowed themselves to be bullied by the courts. But there proclamations/rulings have no force of law. They cannot enforce their rulings
Click to expand...

Wow, I bet some of the Insurance companies I have won large verdicts against wish they had known that before sending the money the court ordered them to send.
 
Jarod said:
You are so dumb if you think this thread is about if he wins or not.
Click to expand...

Thats what the title of your op implies.....and how the thread evolved.....

so whats your opinion on post 26....I surely value your expertise as a renowned lawyer.....
 
NOVA said:
So Counselor, I'm just curious....what is your personal opinion of a District Court that has a record of being overturned by the Supreme

Court in over 80% of their decisions .... thats quite a record. !

.... one or the other obviously isn't getting it right....one or the other don't know wtf their doing....

you think its the SC that gets it wrong or the 9th Dist. Clowns ?
Click to expand...

You don't understand that there is no absolute right or wrong. There are simply ways of interpreting things. Some opinions are more clear cut than others, but still no absolute. The issues relating to the ban are not simple. You also have to understand that regarding this ban, we are talking about an injunction on the ban, which carries a much lower burden than an actual determination as to if the ban is Constitutional or not.

I think the 9th is overturned more than the others because it is the one less like the Supreme Court. The 9th is less Harvard and Yale dominated and has justices from a broader spectrum of experience and life than the Northeast Corridor. The Judges don't have as much of what I call the Ivy League bias, but that causes them to be overturned more by the Ivy League bias that is prevalent on the Supreme Court.
 
NOVA said:
Thats what the title of your op implies.....and how the thread evolved.....

so whats your opinion on post 26....I surely value your expertise as a renowned lawyer.....
Click to expand...

This thread was about Trump accepting the rule of law, not if he wins or loses on any particular issue.
 
The burden for the Government regarding the injunction is much lower than it will be if the Constitutionality of the Statute is determined by the Supreme Court.

Depending on what the Government does, the S.Ct. could quickly hear the injunction, higher burden within the next week or so...

or

The S. Ct. could hear the lower burden Constitutionality issue in a few months.
 
Truth Detector said:
Wrong again shit-for-brains; poor American citizens who are again placed at risk. But alas, you're a low IQ dullard on steroids and lack the intelligence it takes to tie your shoes every morning.

Dunce.
Click to expand...

Ah Booga Booga Booga!!

More bullshit fear mongering from another dim bulb Trumpkin.
 
Jarod said:
Trumps Tweet, (comma splice not withstanding) was good news for those of us who feared he would not follow the rule of law.

Many of Trumps comments and personality traits led me to believe he was a tyrant who knew no bounds. He acts like he does not care about anything or anyone who disagrees with him and will not respect any such limits on him actions.

However his Tweet last night was good news.

"SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!"


That seemingly defiant tweet is a subtle acknowledgement of the rule of law and authority of the Court. Trump could have said, "The security of our nation is at stake" and then instructed his departments to enforce the ban anyway. We would be facing Constitutional crisis and a Coup D'etat, as I have previously mentioned in other threads.

In that one Tweet, grammar aside, Trump recognized and reaffirmed the authority of the Court even when the Nations security is at stake. I dont know if that was his intention, but even so, I am happy with the result.
Click to expand...

The 9th? Its a simple cure.....simply execute another EO in detail that cannot be subjected to left wing rhetorical bull shit. Draft the EO in such a manner that it details the rule of law detailing the fact that Immigration falls under executive authority....detail the number of murders around the globe committed by ISLAM, and point to the fact that all acts of Islamic terrorism that is detailed in the EO are all 100% MUSLIM in nature. Game over. Its oxymoronic to suggest that you can target Islamic terrorism without limiting MUSLIM immigration. In the meanwhile concentrate on appointing another constitutional advocate to SCOTUS.

This latest act of left wing luancy was not unexpected by anyone that has witnessed the 9th in action before. The dog and phony was unnecessary...the ruling was predetermined, it was just a necessary step.
 
How many attacks resulted from Iraqis here?

You silly hypocrites whine about Trump while saying NOTHING about Obama's ban, well, except you all said that, that is different.

I'm so sick of political hypocrites. Our country is going down the tubes because of people and politicians like you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top