Quote Quoting flyingron
View Post
The 9th circuit didn't rule at all on the constitutionality. It just says that the Federal government's case is not apparenlty a sure win.
That is one of my points. They could have if they chose to. They didn't because it didn't fit the narrative.

Quote Quoting flyingron
View Post
The procedural issues (that the state have no standing to sue or that EO's aren't judiciarlly reviewable) were pretty obviously dismissed out of hand. They think the Constituationality points aren't sure wins for the Feds either, so then they have to decide whehter the injunction is with merit. Since there's much more harm in repealing it than retaining it, they have to keep it.
You don't find it a little troubling that standing was based on a state's harm because a professor or speaker couldn't get into the country? And it wasn't that they couldn't get into the country, it was that they had to be vetted. Really?

Quote Quoting flyingron
View Post
Either way the 9th decided, this isn't the end of it anyhow. The decision is only on whether the ban would be stayed while the case proceeds through the court.

People can throw all the rhetoric at it they want, but it's reading too much into it to claim that this is a WIN or LOSS for either side. It just gives some comfort for the anti-Trump side in the short term.
I agree with you on these points. You can be sure that the next executive order will be better crafted. It's only been 26 days. I suppose there is a learning curve here.