Quote Quoting budwad
View Post
The decision of the 9th Circuit was a political decision where they parsed the executive order to fit their political needs. It was not based on the law although plenty of law was cited. It was wrong on standing, it was wrong on religion, it was wrong on a travel ban.

When judges have no f'ing clue (to quote a member) what the law is and promote a personal agenda you lose the rule of law.
And you have no f'ing clue what you're talking abouit. The ninth circuit didn't say what you allege nor apparently were the politically motivated (by the way they were Republican appointees).

What they ruled was there was inndeed standing and reviewability. Trump's arguments were pretty farcical especially on the last argument.

What they have stated is that there's a likelihood that the states will prevail in their case and the impacts of upholding the injunction far outweight the impact of releasing it.
Note, in analyzing the likelihood of success, the first Constitutional issue they held up is the DUE PROCESS clause. It's pretty apparent that there's not only no due process BEFORE the action was taken, this is even being denied AFTERWARDS. After acknowledging that issue, they address the religious discrimination issue which is with two parts. The first is the assertion that the ban specifically targets Muslims. This one perhaps is arguable since while the countries listed are predomiently muslim, there are many other countries (middle east and elsewhere in the world) that are predominently muslim and not affected. The thing that damn's Trump here is his own public rhetoric in which he states to ban muslim entry. Note that the "motivation" can determine constitutionality even if the effect is not all encompassing.

So the 9th circuit DESPITE YOUR PROTESTATIONS has not ruled the ban is unconstitutional.

It just has ruled that it's not clearly constitutional to the point that would justify removing the stay, weighed against the impact against the affected parties if it were indeed found unconstitutional.

You can read it here: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastor...9/17-35105.pdf