Travel Ban Reversal... · CigarBid Forums

Free Fall
Auctions

Specials
Auctions

QuickBuy
Auctions

Newly Added
Auctions

Ending Soon
Auctions

Welcome Guest

Forum Terms & Conditions | My Topics

DrafterX
Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter

9 years ago

When the Supreme Court reverses the travel ban can they punish the other courts for being stupid..?? 😕

Wanna join the discussion?! Login to your CigarBid Forums forum account or Register a new forum account

rfenst
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

No.

DrafterX
Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter

9 years ago

Even if their decision was politically motivated instead of based on law..?? 😕

teedubbya
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

Well since the ban was only for 90 days and 120 days so the administration can figure out what the hell is going on they can just drop it now since presumably it was only temporary. Certainly they've fixed things since it would have already run its course.

DrafterX
Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter

9 years ago

That's not the point...[-(

delta1
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

Good thing none of those terrorists that Trump was trying to prevent coming into the US made it here...maybe the vetting that we've been doing before is extreme enough...

...gotta give Trump credit though...his controversial and legally stayed travel bans have had the desired effect...fewer people from those countries have come into the US, and slowdowns by the state dept., understaffed in the Trump administration, have contributed...more than one way to skin the doggy...

Edited by user 9 years ago | Reason: Not specified

DrafterX
Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter

9 years ago

Supreme Court reinstates da travel ban... As they should've.... 👍

rfenst
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

Supreme Court reinstates da travel ban... As they should've.... 👍

DrafterX wrote:

Hold on. It was not a complete reinstatement and there is still uncertainty over the whole thing because the Court has not even heard the case yet.

rfenst
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

teedubbya wrote:

Certainly a strong argument against the ban- that it is moot.

opelmanta1900
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#10

Hold on. It was not a complete reinstatement and there is still uncertainty over the whole thing because the Court has not even heard the case yet.

rfenst wrote:

true... but they probably will reinstate the entire thing... there's nothing unconstitutional about the law, only the way some activist judges have interpreted it based on other statements made by trump that they didn't like (even though there was nothing unconstitutional about what he said).... liberal judges trying to score points for the left... but it's a 2 headed dog and both ends bite... libs will have power again someday and every single thing they try to accomplish will be thwarted by conservative judges trying to score points for the right...

victor809
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#11

I wonder frequently where drafter gets his news. He doesn't seem to understand a whole lot of what goes on in the world.

Supreme court agreed to hear the ban.

Supreme court allowed the ban to partially be in place while it is being heard (however individuals with some connection to the us... relatives, students.. Will not have the ban apply to them)

Supreme court won't hear it until Oct. As the travel ban is literally only a 90 day executive order, it will likely expire before a decision is made.

What did trump do in the past 100+ days anyway to put in place whatever solution he actually intended? Oh... nothing?... what an idiot.

opelmanta1900
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#12

again, make sure you watch to see how much the next dem president can accomplish in the first 100 days... everything accomplishment they attempt will be shopped around to a conservative judge who finds part or all of it unconstitutional and it'll go on the backburner until the (conservative leaning) supreme court has time to hear it.... and good luck with that...

mark my words, it'll be a long time - likely decades, and maybe never - before any president accomplishes anything in their first 100 days...

Edited by user 9 years ago | Reason: Not specified

rfenst
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#13

opelmanta1900 wrote:

The simple solution to all of this is a ban on ALL people who want to come in to the U.S, until they are properly vetted.

opelmanta1900
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#14

The simple solution to all of this is a ban on ALL people who want to come in to the U.S, until they are properly vetted.

rfenst wrote:

simple yes, but certainly not good...

there's a reason the obama administration single out these particular countries as being of increased danger in regards to the people they export to us... whatever that intel was that obama used should be sufficient to show causation for enacting a travel ban against those countries... unless obama's intel was bad... guess the supreme court will figure that out...

tailgater
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#15

Justice Thomas said it best when he said that our Nation's security is more important than temporary individual inconvenience.

This is only a small victory for Trump.
The lower courts could have adopted the same "limited" ban, with family etc. being admitted.
Instead they chose to make it a partisan issue rather than a legal one, as proven by the SC decision.
It's truly shameful.

tailgater
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#16

The simple solution to all of this is a ban on ALL people who want to come in to the U.S, until they are properly vetted.

rfenst wrote:

That's why we frisk grandmothers and 4 year old kids at the airport.
Because it's "simple".

victor809
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#17

Look at tail with his "SC decision" on something which hasn't been heard yet.... he's so far up trumps butt that he can see the future.

Abrignac
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#18

Look at tail with his "SC decision" on something which hasn't been heard yet.... he's so far up trumps butt that he can see the future.

victor809 wrote:

It's pretty sad that the President who is responsile for border security can't shut the borders down to prevent those who would do harm from entering.

frankj1
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#19

Justice Thomas said it best when he said that our Nation's security is more important than temporary individual inconvenience.

tailgater wrote:

the man never utters a sound, and when he finally does, it's to say that Benjamin Franklin was stupid.

Anyway, it is true that the 90 days would pass, which may indicate current vetting works (I did say "may").

I also feel more concern about the multiple American born citizens going off on horrendous acts of terror, as they seem to be the most successful.

Speyside
Herf-A-Holic

9 years ago

#20

I would like to see Americans vetted who travel to countries with state sponsored terrorism ( is that the correct phrase? ). This probably would create a big upset, but to many atrocities have been commitee by these lone wolves, who became radicalized and went to the middle east for training.

Users browsing this topic

Important Information: