Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 79
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    130

    Default How Will Trump's Travel Ban Work

    Hi

    Hope this is ok to post this. I am not in need of assistance here, but was wondering if someone can set me straight on the law, and how things work in the judicial system. And assuming this thread is ok, please let's not turn this into a political discussion, and debate whether the President is right or wrong from a moral perspective; I am inquiring to satisfy my curiosity about the law and the courts.

    I have not read the exec. order, but I have read the law dealing with immigration, which seems to suggest that the exec. order is legal. USC 1182 sec. (f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President - seems to suggest that the President may suspend entry to this country of anyone, if he feels such entry would be detrimental to the interests of the USA.

    Plus, there is the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952 which allows the President to place a temporary restriction on immigration based on country of origin, which further seems to support the President's authority here.

    So, I question what grounds any judge has to stay the ban - if the judge's job is to uphold the law, and not to create new law nor to ignore laws that he/she does not like, why then is this so complicated? It would seem (to me, a lay person), that the judge would look at those laws, and say, "well, this is what the law says!" And that would be it. But obviously not. What am I missing here?

    Thanks in advance.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Lake Chapala
    Posts
    3,043

    Default Re: Inquiry of Trump's Travel Ban - Curiousity

    What you're missing here is the evidence the judges have.

    The judges have what is apparently solid evidence that the ban is in reality based on religious grounds, and not on country of origin. The evidence apparently shows very clearly that the "country of origin" bit is simply a means to disguise the apparent fact that the ban is really based on religious grounds. If the evidence proves that the ban is based on religious grounds, then the ban is illegal. Until we know how strong the evidence is (and judges are right now looking into it as we speak), we really have no idea whether or not Trump's ban is legal or illegal. Nor can we speculate, as we have not seen the evidence ourselves.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Somewhere near Canada
    Posts
    35,894

    Default Re: Inquiry of Trump's Travel Ban - Curiousity

    Quote Quoting riffwraith
    View Post
    Hi

    Hope this is ok to post this. I am not in need of assistance here, but was wondering if someone can set me straight on the law, and how things work in the judicial system. And assuming this thread is ok, please let's not turn this into a political discussion, and debate whether the President is right or wrong from a moral perspective; I am inquiring to satisfy my curiosity about the law and the courts.

    I have not read the exec. order, but I have read the law dealing with immigration, which seems to suggest that the exec. order is legal. USC 1182 sec. (f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President - seems to suggest that the President may suspend entry to this country of anyone, if he feels such entry would be detrimental to the interests of the USA.

    Plus, there is the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952 which allows the President to place a temporary restriction on immigration based on country of origin, which further seems to support the President's authority here.

    So, I question what grounds any judge has to stay the ban - if the judge's job is to uphold the law, and not to create new law nor to ignore laws that he/she does not like, why then is this so complicated? It would seem (to me, a lay person), that the judge would look at those laws, and say, "well, this is what the law says!" And that would be it. But obviously not. What am I missing here?

    Thanks in advance.

    Read this: http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/07/opinio...enany-opinion/

    Welp, round #3 looks like it's about to begin after 9th Circuit rules unanimously against the DOJ.

    full text of decision

    (apologies for the CNN link; the news channels are the only places I can find the whole decision this early on)

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Lake Chapala
    Posts
    3,043

    Default Re: Inquiry of Trump's Travel Ban - Curiousity

    The three judges have just announced they are allowing the retraining order on the ban to remain. In other words, the ban is still illegal in the eyes of the judiciary. (This may change at some point in the future, but for now, this is what it is.)

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    130

    Default Re: Inquiry of Trump's Travel Ban - Curiousity

    Thanks for the replies.

    So, it appears as tho the exec. order banned people who already have visas, and who already have been vetted. So, my Q is how could the President and those he worked with the order on make such a faux pas? Theoretical Q really, but if that is in fact the case, that changed my opinion of the court's decision.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,006

    Default Re: Inquiry of Trump's Travel Ban - Curiousity

    Quote Quoting riffwraith
    View Post
    So, my Q is how could the President and those he worked with the order on make such a faux pas?
    Because he, and those he chooses to surround himself with and take counsel from, have no f'ing clue how government nor silly things like the law work.

    Had he spoken to even the people responsible for carrying this order out prior to issuing it, he would have known he was in the wrong. I don't think that would have stopped him but he would have at least been on notice.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    7,056

    Default Re: Inquiry of Trump's Travel Ban - Curiousity

    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.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,006

    Default Re: Inquiry of Trump's Travel Ban - Curiousity

    Quote Quoting budwad
    View Post
    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.
    I think judges know a little bit more about the law than you do bud.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    16,474

    Default Re: Inquiry of Trump's Travel Ban - Curiousity

    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.
    Bud, even people with green cards were being denied entry, as well as people who were already vetted. There was nothing political about the decision at all.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    19,901

    Default Re: Inquiry of Trump's Travel Ban - Curiousity

    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

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Probation and Parole: Getting Permission for Work-Related Travel While on Probation
    By lumbeetravelers in forum Probation, Parole and Incarceration
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-13-2014, 07:01 PM
  2. Legal Permanent Residency: Can a Permanent Resident Travel Abroad for Work
    By Ginawu in forum Permanent Residency and Naturalization
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-01-2013, 07:43 AM
  3. Probation and Parole: How to Obtain a Travel Permit for Work in the State of California
    By ilovealo in forum Probation, Parole and Incarceration
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-09-2012, 09:42 AM
  4. Probation and Parole: Travel for Work While on Parole and Probation in Georgia
    By Chelle_in_Georgia in forum Probation, Parole and Incarceration
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-06-2010, 08:33 AM
  5. Can A Permanent Resident Travel Abroad For Work
    By cristianofl in forum Permanent Residency and Naturalization
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-18-2008, 03:38 PM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources