Breaking: Appeals court upholds ruling blocking Trump's immigration order

What did they say was illegal or unconstitutional about the EO?

"The public “has an interest in free flow of travel, in avoiding separation of families, and in freedom from discrimination,” the three-judge panel said in a 29-page ruling."

Where does the Constitution say that family inconvenience of persons who are not US citizens trumps the Presidents plenary power with regards to national security and immigration. Where does this judge get the Constitutional authority to over ride the President on an immigration issue? Where does US Code or the Constitution grant the right to enter the country to any foreign alien in the world?

Where did this court address any of this?

 

Its the authority of judges to rule Presidential Orders "illegal", if they deem it to be so.

 

You appear to think terrorism is a figment of the mind. What is one to think?

 

Trump seems to think 9-11 never happened

 

If they follow the law and constitution although its no where to be found in the constitution of them having such power

 

Not according to liberals, it is now the responsibility of the judiciary.

 

link for the 1952 act =https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1952
Here is a synopsis of the 1952 act

If Trump was a grown up he would have presented his case during the campaign by saying that he will ban any aliens that that are threat to the United States. Instead the Dildo Brained Turnip aka Trump said that he will ban Muslims.

 

This is not even the issue here and was not subject to review by this court but they did anyway. There only issues was does the President have the authority to issue such an order which clearly he does. They questioned the US attorney on whether the policy, the invoking of the law, was warranted, that is NOT theirs to judge especially in a ruling about a stay. That is for review in the actual trial on the merits and no state has shown where the President does not have the authority or a legal or Constitutional reason to challenge and revoke this presidential order.

 

Its the role of courts to decide if the government is doing something that violates Federal law or the Constitution.

 

What's the basis for claiming the "class of aliens" identified in the EO are "detrimental to the interests of the United States?" Hopefully you have something more than the Blowhard-In-Chief's tweets.

 

Checks and balances… you know? Some people see the EO as overstepping legal bounds. The President absolutely has the power to control immigration and travel, as long as it is written Constitutionally. Problem is, this one wasn't done that way. Trump has an army of lawyers at his beck and call, and chose not to consult them on this one because he thought no one could challenge him on it. Trump was wrong. He needs to use the resources he has at hand, rather than relying on what he thought was unlimited power to do what he wanted.

Oh, I agree. The problem is, he's sold this controversial EO as being critical, if temporary, to safety, when it was a political move. Since he's on record now as saying he was ok with delaying it for a week or a month, it doesn't seem to be so critical after all. The opposition will crucify his case on those statements.

 

Why should he? He has been let off the hook for any terrorist attacks that happen. All he has to say is "well, I tried but the dems blocked my efforts".....

 

The problem with Trump is that he is incompetent when it comes to national security, as demonstrated by this idiotic EO.

 

There was a leftist generated survey a few years ago with shocking results. Something like ninety percent of the Muslims surveyed inside the United States of America wanted Sharia Law established. Interesting, eh?

 

I'm not that skeptical.
I'm more inclined to think that this was planned. Trump is more than one step ahead of these folks.

 

Four judges say you're wrong. Want to go for twelve?

 

Link to the text of the 1952 immigration act

http://tucnak.fsv.cuni.cz/~calda/Documents/1950s/McCarran_52.html

I recommend that everyone who wants to discuss this topic here read this.

just a small tiny section as an example

 

Yes. They have taken control of national security. It's on them now.

 

Vetted by the DOJ, NSA, and DHS. Most of which are Obama carryovers.

 

Abraham Lincoln defied the Supreme Court. So he was wrong you say?

 

And that refutes what I said how? Where am I off base here?

Where did they state the constitutional and statutory reasons for which they were interfering with the constitutional and statutory authority of the President on matters on national security and foreign policy in particular with persons who have not constitutional protections or right to enter this country?

 

What stuns me most is the Jew hating crowd, the anti Christians are telling us we must have all from those 7 countries and their reason is they happen to like Muslims a lot. Enough so to risk other people's lives trusting them.

 

OK and to whom do they report and under whose direction do they act?

 

I hope so. It doesnt change the fact that our laws are second to ideology and our judicial courts think they are law makers instead of law keepers.

 

What violation of federal law or unconstitutional act did the court cite?