Executive Action Visa/Refugee Legal Briefs To Be Considered Today by Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals…

justice_scalesThe White House says it expects the courts to restore President Donald Trump’s temporary ban on Syrian refugees and 90-day suspended visa status for travelers from seven countries, via an executive order founded on a claim of national security.

Despite the initial 9th circuit denial of the Trump administration’s request to immediately set aside a Seattle judge’s ruling that put a hold on the executive order nationwide, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (the most liberal and overturned appellate court in the nation) requested legal briefs from both sides by 6:00 pm EST today / 3:00 pm PST.

(Via AP) [4:30am EST]  Lawyers for Washington state and Minnesota have told a federal appellate court it would “unleash chaos again” if it lifted an order temporarily halting President Donald Trump’s ban on refugees and travelers from seven predominantly Muslim countries from entering the United States.

In briefs filed early Monday morning with the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Washington state and Minnesota said Trump’s travel ban harmed residents, businesses and universities and was unconstitutional. 

[…]  Dozens of tech companies, including giants like Apple, Google, and Uber, are siding with Washington state as it fights President Donald Trump’s ban on refugees and travelers from seven predominantly Muslim countries from entering the United States.

The companies filed briefs late Sunday with a federal appellate court saying the Trump executive order hurts their businesses by making it harder to recruit employees. The companies also said the travel ban would prompt businesses to build operations outside the United States  (read more)

According to the Washington Times, Byron York, the White House has already filed the appellate brief sometime on Sunday.

Byron York […]  Now the government has answered [Judge] Robart, and unlike the judge, Justice Department lawyers have produced a point-by-point demolition of Washington State’s claims. Indeed, for all except the most partisan, it is likely impossible to read the Washington State lawsuit, plus Robart’s brief comments and writing on the matter, plus the Justice Department’s response, and not come away with the conclusion that the Trump order is on sound legal and constitutional ground.

Beginning with the big picture, the Justice Department argued that Robart’s restraining order violates the separation of powers, encroaches on the president’s constitutional and legal authority in the areas of foreign affairs, national security, and immigration, and “second-guesses the president’s national security judgment” about risks faced by the United States.  (read more)

trump-tweet-judge-visa-ban

[…] Despite the overwhelming strength of the administration’s argument, what happens next — as the case is argued in a liberal circuit and then possibly moves on to a Supreme Court divided evenly, 4 to 4, among liberal and conservative justices — is impossible to predict. But strength of the case does not assure victory. As Laura Ingraham, the conservative radio host who also served as a clerk for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, tweeted on Sunday: “The law is on Donald Trump‘s side. Doesn’t mean that the courts will follow it.”  (more)

Advertisements
This entry was posted in 1st Amendment, A New America, AG Jeff Sessions, Agitprop, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Cultural Marxism, Dept Of Justice, DHS, Iran, Iraq, ISIS, Islam, Jeff Sessions, Jihad, media bias, Muslim Grievance Industry - MGI, Political correctness/cultural marxism, President Trump, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Refugees, Secretary of State, Syria, Terrorist Attacks, Travel, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized, Yemen. Bookmark the permalink.

688 Responses to Executive Action Visa/Refugee Legal Briefs To Be Considered Today by Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals…

    • Dixie says:

      Mari, I’m not sure I believe this (no backup link) but I heard that congress is getting 1-1/2 million calls per day. If so, that’s comforting.

      Like

  1. Sharon says:

    “Lawyers for Washington state and Minnesota have told a federal appellate court it would ‘unleash chaos again’ if it lifted an order … ”

    It would be helpful if the appellate court would point out to those lawyers that possible reactions to a ruling are not a primary reason to rule one way or the other. If that were the guideline, Judge Roberts would have voted obamacare down, since it did, in fact, unleash chaos that brought financial and health care consequences on the entire nation.

    That statement by those lawyers needs to be Alinsky’d – they must not be allowed to ask for anything or do anything in the future that has legal force if it might cause people to feel chaotic.

    Our Republic was to be a nation of laws, not of men.

    Liked by 15 people

    • mtkennedy21 says:

      This is all about H1B visas. The judge is from Microsoftland. There are already amicus briefs from other software and IT heavy corporations on the way. This is about indentured servants from India who will lose their legal status if they quit their low paid jobs. American IT workers were forced to train the HB visa serfs to replace them as a condition of severance and recommendation letters. It’s about the Benjamins. When they say “It’s not about the money.” It’s about the money.

      Liked by 15 people

      • Give it Time says:

        As someone who has worked for startups in Silicon Valley I can attest to this. Companies like AirBNB and the various other mid-stage companies CAN NOT exist without cheap programmers. Their business models, and therefore, their investors money is completely on the line. Does this mean their models are flawed? I would suggest so. If a company can not operate profitably without taking advantage of human capital then their entire system is flawed.

        It is actually a very obvious, if you choose to see it, admission that most of the recent startup successes are simply destructive businesses taking advantage of legal loop-holes (like Uber is a “ride-sharing” service).

        Liked by 7 people

      • Somebody says:

        Absolutely mtkennedy, you are 100% correct.

        Like

    • Stephen Murphy says:

      The part where company says it can not recruit new employees is BS; They prefer to hire H1B visa holders, rather than Americans. I feel no sorrow for them, Lets hire Americans and put them to work!!! America for Americans!!!

      Liked by 4 people

    • repsort says:

      Goes to show how lost our judicial branch is… It’s why Roberts tied himself in a pretzel to ensure Obastardcares survival.. They look at everything BUT the law 😦

      Liked by 3 people

    • The Demon Slick says:

      First thing I noticed. Emotional argument, not a legal one.

      Liked by 1 person

    • jdvalk says:

      This excuse has been used to deny free speech and other enforcement of law and upholding of rights in favor of system-gaming agitators. Rinse,repeat.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Paul Revere says:

      This is the story at the Minneapolis Star Tribune:

      Public housing residents in Minneapolis will no longer need to pay their normal monthly rent when travel abroad erases their income, a change particularly sought by East African immigrants.

      The board of the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority approved this week reverting to its previous policy of collecting only minimal rent during extended absences. The change takes effect once approved by federal housing officials, which is expected by year’s end.
      warsame-dayton1

      Minnesota Governor Dayton with Warsame. Remember Dayton is the MN pol who said if you don’t like our Somalis, you can move to another state. https://refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com/2015/10/16/mn-governor-dayton-dont-like-immigrants-get-out-of-minnesota/

      Abdi Warsame, a City Council member, told the board that the policy in place for the past five years works a particular hardship on elderly East Africans who must save for long periods if they want to visit their homelands. He said that many receive federal Supplemental Security Income, which is halted when the recipient is outside the United States.

      Yet the policy required people to keep paying rent, which is income-based. Travelers gone for 30 to 90 days could apply for a hardship, which meant that they paid the minimum $75 monthly rent during their absence, but were required to make up the difference between that and their normal rent over the next year or two.

      The change will mean that residents will pay only the $75 minimum per month, assuming they apply for the hardship status. [Hardship status! Hardship status! How many of you have airfare money to fly to Africa?—ed]

      From 50 to 75 public housing residents report such absences annually, according to Mary Boler, an agency manager. She said the cost of the change will be less than $50,000. The agency found that the paperwork burden of tracking repayment was higher than anticipated.

      “This was brought up to us again and again and again in every building we visited in our ward,” Warsame said. “Everybody was afraid to leave the country.” [But they weren’t afraid to go home to Somalia the country they supposedly escaped from???—ed]

      Like

  2. ryanomalley1 says:

    The judicial branch is the weakest branch yet everybody thinks they are the most powerful. The executive branch can simply not enforce his decision. It is that simple.

    Liked by 5 people

    • remuda2016 says:

      Lots of “Red Herrings” here.

      There is no constitutional requirement that district courts exist at all.

      Judges on these Article IV territorial courts do not enjoy the protections of Article Three of the Constitution, and serve terms of ten years rather than for life.

      Federal courts may not decide every case that happens to come before them. In order for a district court to entertain a lawsuit, Congress must first grant the court subject matter jurisdiction over the type of dispute in question.

      Generally, a final ruling by a district court in either a civil or a criminal case can be appealed to the United States court of appeals in the federal judicial circuit in which the district court is located, except that some district court rulings involving patents and certain other specialized matters must be appealed instead to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and in a very few cases the appeal may be taken directly
      to the United States Supreme Court.

      So…As Chief Justice Roberts might say:
      “Jim…You’re Fired…!

      Jim Robart’s theme song…

      Liked by 2 people

      • facebkwallflower says:

        So, why does President even bother appealing? (I am probably not understanding everything you share.

        Like

        • ladypenquin says:

          He has to appeal because the it went to the 9th Circuit Court who will receive arguments from both sides by 6PM today. That’s the rub. The 9th Circuit is a Lefty circus, so if we “lose” there – it goes to the Supremes, and then more trouble with a 4/4 court. The law is on the president’s side, but that’s never stopped the smarmy Left, but then, neither did our side.
          I pray that President Trump can beat these bullies down, down, down. Schumer and Company continue to behave like they’re still in power, and that’s the most dangerous situation of all for the country.

          Liked by 2 people

          • Notmeagain says:

            It doesn’t matter if this appeal wins or loses, the loser is going to take it to the next level. That’s the game. There was never going to be a “foolproof EO” that wouldn’t be challenged. The precedent was already set by the conservatives during Obama’s reign. Therefore what we are really waiting for is to find out what Trump has in mind, because I’m sure he foresaw that something like this would soon occur. Isn’t there already a suit against some other EO? I expect every issue to be litigated and if I were Trump I’d be thinking of some way to curtail this process.

            Liked by 1 person

            • mimbler says:

              Actually, I think it does matter. If we prevail in the 9th and it goes to the Supreme a 4/4 split lets the decision stay.
              If we lose in the 9th same thing applies. We would be better off winning in the 9th, so that a 4/4 does not play against us,
              Mike

              Liked by 1 person

          • dustycowpoke says:

            Think about this during the run up to election and after President Trump was inagurated Justice Ginsberg was very vocal how she felt about Donald Trump as President. So… Justice Ginsberg has just earned the opportunity for recusal.

            Like

        • TheseTruths says:

          facebkwallflower: It looks as if you’re responding to ryanomalley1, who said:
          “The judicial branch is the weakest branch yet everybody thinks they are the most powerful. The executive branch can simply not enforce his decision. It is that simple.”

          So yes, if it’s that simple, why appeal it at all? What would it look like for the executive branch to not enforce the decision, when everyone else is abiding by it? Pres. Trump would say, “This is an unlawful restraining order, so continue to obey my original order”? And what then?

          Like

      • ladypenquin says:

        Talk about nostalgia, one of my favorites. Anyone notice the phrase in there of “when I come back I’ll bring your wedding ring”? So long ago when that was considered important in relationships. It’s difficult feeling like we’ve lost so much… Guess some of us are dinosaurs from another century.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Ficklefinger says:

      This faux judge Robart is acting outside of his authority in the law and is therefore nothing but an outlaw. His order can not only be defied by the President, he could be ordered arrested by the President for seditious interference with national security as an exclusive power granted to the President under the U.S. Constitution and the statutes as enacted by Congress. This out-of-control judge cannot “force” the President to do his tyrannical bidding He cannot enforce a contempt order against a president acting lawfully, nor can Robart usurp powers never granted to him or to any other federal judge. His order is void on its face and thus not enforceable under law.

      Liked by 6 people

      • facebkwallflower says:

        This is the route I would have loved to see President Trump take instead of abdicating his authority by appealing.

        Like

      • Unless I misunderstand the word, “sedition” (under 18 U.S.C. § 2385, 2011) specifically requires a purposeful action advocating the overthrow of the US government (or a state, territory etc.) by violence. Maybe judge Robart’s order is wrong or insufficiently justified, and that’s up to the interpretation of the three-judge panel of the Ninth circuit, the appeals court. But I can’t understand how his order could possibly qualify as “seditious”. There is no contempt order levied against the President.

        The two states asked for an order of restraint, arguing that the executive order disrupted the process of doing business without justification (such as a specified threat to national security), and harmed residents in a variety of ways. The restraining order, though applied nationally, is temporary, and subject to review by the Ninth. The DOJ gets to justify the threat if it can. And the states must be able to demonstrate the harm done to them. The constitutionality of neither the executive order, nor the TRO are put before the Ninth. The question they will rule on is whether there is justification to continue restraining the travel ban, or not.

        Liked by 1 person

        • mike says:

          The shoe is on the wrong foot. The Executive determined the threat. Now some Leftist district court ho’ says “parooove it to me“. We are in an actual Invasion being overrun, although not remotely acknowledged by the Left (traitors). Actual invasion, re Articles I and IV. The Sharia of the slavers’ code cannot coexist with the Constitutionally guaranteed republican form of government, a fact known since declared by Jefferson. Groups of people who have even already begun the processes of genocidal dispossession, with no go zones, terror training camps, recruitment, violence, intimidation and making life toxic to non-Islamic citizens.

          I say put the mf’r in front of a military commission for treason and then shoot him.
          Otherwise it’s time for the militias’ descendents of the 1770s to gather their 300 million guns and show these mf’rs the door themselves.
          http://www.worcesterma.gov/city-clerk/history/general/worcester-revolution

          Like

  3. jstanley01 says:

    Regardless of who the president is, when some state attorney general and a single federal judge out in the boondocks can block an executive order that deals with national security, it is self evident that the judicial system in this country is in dire need of reform.

    If the executive and the judiciary are to be, in fact, co-equal branches of the government, then orders from the top of the Executive Branch, namely the President, should be immediately adjudicated before the top of the Judicial Branch, namely the Supreme Court.

    The Supreme Court had better figure out how to reform the judicial system itself, or the reform should be imposed upon them.

    Liked by 7 people

    • MaineCoon says:

      Reform should include term limits (or something) for the Federal judges. Not life terms. No accountability.

      Liked by 1 person

    • scott says:

      Reform isn’t the job of SCOTUS. That is solely the job of Congress.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Ficklefinger says:

      As the USA is chock full of activist judges who want to issue orders far beyond their authority, I believe Trump will face continuing unlawful interference with his office and powers and ultimately be forced to defy these judges’ unlawful orders and probably have to have them arrested to gain constitutional control over his office and constitutional powers.

      He may have to arrest federal district and appeals court judges who act beyond their authority or he will find himself stripped of all of his constitutional power by Leftist judicial tyrants like this idiot, Robart, who will NEVER STOP violently disagreeing with his policies but have no constitutional authority to strip him of his constitutional and statutory powers.

      This may force an impeachment vote against Trump in the House of Representatives but such a vote may be necessary to re-instate the rule of law and not continue an endless, lawless bullying by those criminal judges in policy disagreement with Trump.

      If the United States Senate were to convict President Trump as a criminal for demanding the powers he is constitutionally granted, there will be no masquerading about the obvious end of United States of America, in that capitulation to tyranny.

      If a President cannot exercise his constitutional and lawful powers, because of lawlessness inside the judiciary, it is best to have the American people see and understand the country has passed the tipping point of a civil and lawful society so decent people can take to the streets in massive numbers to demand repeal and replacement of this corrupt system as Thomas Jefferson expected they would have to. The Declaration of Independence itself is a moral justification for overthrowing the exact kind of unlawful and untethered tyranny we are now witnessing.

      Liked by 3 people

      • jstanley01 says:

        The Supreme Court has the final say on what is constitutional, not based on the Constitution giving it that power, but based on precedent starting with Marbury v. Madison.

        The country needs a mechanism for Congress and/or the states to reverse Supreme Court decisions. Had a reversal process been in place for the states during the Obama presidency, the country would not be suffering now under the blatantly unconstitutional individual mandate of ObamaDon’tCare, a.k.a. RobertsDon’tCare.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Howie says:

        There is a lot of water to cover before it comes to that.

        Like

      • TheseTruths says:

        Arrest the judges on what grounds?

        Like

    • facebkwallflower says:

      One thing that totally befuddles me is all these courts being considered part of the “Judicial Branch” . In fourth grade, in high school, and again in college it was taught the Three Constitutional Branches of Government:

      Executive: The President
      Judicial: The Supreme Court
      Legislative: Congress/Senate

      Like

    • The DOJ was free to appeal directly to the Supreme Court. They voluntarily chose not to, indicating they were satisfied by the rapid consideration (by the Ninth) of whether to continue restraining the travel ban.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Kroesus says:

      by Article II powers Congress not only determines the construct of the federal court system below SCOTUS but can also impose jurisdictional limits on the different levels of the court

      Like

  4. Wend says:

    “Justice Marshall has ruled. Now let him enforce”-Andrew Jackson.

    Liked by 7 people

  5. beentheredonethat says:

    The best solution right now is for the 9th circuit to uphold the stay. This will allow President Trump to determine when to take it to the Supreme Court. He can let the State Department quietly set the visa requirements to be so stringent no one can pass them and then wait until Gorsuch is seated to bring the case to the Supreme Court.

    I believe that Trump flew this EO just to bait the judicial system for three reasons:

    1) To show the American public how corrupt the legal system is.
    2) To quell any future ability by the judicial system to challenge him on immigration issues.
    3) To begin the fight now before he proceeds with building the wall or extending the visa restrictions.

    Look at it this way. Suppose you know what roadblocks you will face in a major project you’re getting ready to start. Is it better to start the process rolling to deal with the roadblocks right at the beginning of the project or is it better to wait until you’re halfway through and then have to stop what you’re doing to deal with the roadblock?

    The Supreme Court’s decision on this will have huge ramifications on the Wall, and once this case is settled and the Supreme Court upholds that Trump has this authority, no states, PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS or CORPORATIONS will have standing to sue or block Trumps immigration orders, including building the wall.

    I recommend reading “Trump Style Negotiation”. It doesn’t address this issue, but it gives wonderful insight into how Trump’s mind works.

    Now, I will quietly return to my branch that I just found here at the Tree. Blessings to you all, and be of stalwart heart!

    Liked by 30 people

    • cosmo221 says:

      i also agree with your statement. this EO wasnt as tough as I thought it would be. And Its all from the Obama Admin, also highlights the complete bias in the Judicial system.

      Liked by 3 people

    • don welch says:

      that’s a lot of chess moves planned out in advance. not that trump isn’t worthy of your scenario but i just don’t see it. the chicanery of the left is also interdependent on multiple chess moves.

      Like

      • notstuckonstupid says:

        Oh, I believe it. You’d have to be an idiot to think this wasn’t going to be challenged by a liberal hack judge, only to go to the 9th Circuit. Trump’s people are not idiots

        Like

    • E C says:

      Interesting.

      Liked by 1 person

    • MaineCoon says:

      I agree with your three reasons. Trump is a long range strategist.

      I previously posted that I believe he sketched out this action plan at least 2 years ago. Several feel he jumped the gun before cabs were installed. Don’t agree. Nothing is by chance with Trump — he just gives the appearance as they aren’t ready for his moves — which appear quick to Ds/rinos as they are inert.

      I think of President Trump as the eye of the hurricane. Calm. Cool. Collected while all hell breaks loose around him as he watched.

      HURRICANE TRUMP!

      Liked by 5 people

    • coldsnap says:

      I like your thinking, and also believe President Trump and team are several moves ahead. He always has a plan. There are many moving pieces to this puzzle. He is not naive.

      Welcome! Glad to have you join us.

      Liked by 6 people

    • When some “lutheran” from one of these countries blows up LAX.. Trump will say, I tried to stop it, the judge wouldn’t let me. Ticking bomb… it will happen, we just don’t know when.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Wendy says:

      I think you are definitely on to PTrump’s end game. But I think his biggest goal is to put pressure on schumer and Mcturtle from both sides. The left is getting unhinged and they demand Schumer to fillabust and this will give Mcturtle no choice but going nuclear.As you know It’s better if Mcturtle go nuclear this time since all following federal judges and SCOUTUS nominee just need simple majority to be confirmed. I don’t think neither Schumer nor Mcturtle would want to go down that rout as it gives more power to Trump.

      Liked by 2 people

    • ladypenquin says:

      I really appreciate your astute analysis. It keeps up my spirits thinking Trump knows how to play 3D chess and the others are playing checkers. Agree, that in the meantime, the DHS can begin to set visa regs quite tightly, as well as limiting the number of H1B visas, which is what this really all about.

      It’d be nice to see Big Business exposed for wanting to keep replacing American workers with foreign workers, that’s why they’re lining up these lawsuits. It’s always about the money. Starbucks wants to sue for 10,000 foreign hires, go ahead, then they’ll find out how quickly their business shrinks. Plenty of Starbucks around that aren’t located in Elitistville cities. In fact, they on our military bases, so they can be kicked off.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Howie says:

      Smokin’ em out.

      Liked by 1 person

    • cozette says:

      This is Trump once again shining light on a dark corner of corruption. This time activist judges. Just in time for the SCOTUS fight to confirm an originality judge. Any sane American has to be appalled that a Presidents legal order to pause travel from Islamic hot spots for a few days is stopped because a judge just didn’t personally like it. What? Some of us remember the Twin Towers were taken down by people here on Visas. For sane people activist judges are looking very dangerous.

      Liked by 3 people

    • justfactsplz says:

      Welcome to your branch!

      Like

    • Spencer's Mom says:

      Beentheredonethat,

      Thanks for a great explanation of how Trump may be playing 4-D chess while those on the left are still playing checkers.

      I never thought of it that way until i read your comment – but now I feel a whole lot better!

      Liked by 1 person

    • dustycowpoke says:

      Sunshine…blessed … sunshine!

      Like

  6. John22 says:

    Cant Judge Kennedy issue an emergency stay on that Judge’s order if the 9th Circuit ignores the law if he thinks it doesn’t have much chance of success and set a future hearing on it with the SC? Or does it take 5 of the Justices? He covers appeals in that area.

    Like

    • Scott a Karkos says:

      I suspect TRUMP is going through the motions to follow the “law.” When he wins this, he won’t need to make an appeal to Kennedy. But say if he loses, he will make an appearance to Kennedy to stay the order until it gets to SCOTUS.

      I think it will end soon. Even with the 9th here. Washington’s argument is not based on law at all, only feelings and what might happen.

      Liked by 5 people

      • VegasGuy says:

        The questions of the EO on immigration under the challenges…

        http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-s-travel-order-legal-how-challengers-are-opposing-it-n716921

        {SNIP}… ‘The order violates federal laws for implementing policy’
        This argument takes aim at how the Trump administration fulfilled the order. There were wide reports of arbitrary implementation of the travel restrictions, reversals in policy on green card holders and other actions a court might find “arbitrary.”

        That could be a valid issue and the Courts could determine it as such. But, the Administration is free to re-issue the EO with corrective action to comply.

        {SNIP}… ‘The order violates existing federal law on immigration’
        Challengers also argue that Congress already barred discrimination on national origin with a federal law more than 50 years ago.

        The President has full authority under the law to suspend entrance by immigrants he deems detrimental to U.S. interests. A Judge cannot “re-write” the Law as it stands. A Judge can only interpret its’ application under existing circumstances.

        {SNIP} ‘The order violates constitutional rules on due process and freedom of religion’
        This argument brings up to three constitutional amendments into play — the First, the Fifth and the 14th.

        The argument must pass the first test….are the affected individuals either US Citizens or illegal’s actually on US soil? If so, the Constitutional Rights apply. If not, they are arguing about Foreign Nationals merely desiring Visas and the rights do not apply.

        The Administration has already remidied the “Green Card” issue. They are not affected by this order.

        So the challengers must argue whether those affected are US Citizens (Rights apply) or Foreign Nationals (Rights do not apply).

        IMO that argument dies a quick death.

        Liked by 2 people

      • FofBW says:

        Yep, that is how the left rolls…..feelings. True Co-Dependents. Their happiness lies in what others think of them

        Liked by 1 person

      • John22 says:

        Thanks

        Like

    • ladypenquin says:

      I think you’re right. If the 9th Circuit Court keeps ban in place (and they are the most overturned by the SC) then an immediate appeal to Kennedy can take place. But as Scott notes he probably won’t have to. Trump has actually made some good moves here because he’s letting the “law” “judiciary” play itself out…

      Liked by 1 person

    • Justice Kennedy could have issued a stay, but DOJ chose not to appeal to him, being satisfied to go through appeal at the level of the Ninth circuit first. It would take five justices at SCOTUS to reverse a ruling from the Ninth.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Kroesus says:

      believe it is a 3 justice panel to determine suitability for SCOTUS docket…..their nirmal calendar is set for this session with arguments to start this month and final rendering in June…this does not preclude emergency actions by the high court however

      Like

  7. President Trump should sign an executive order halting the issuance of new visas period until this issue is resolved in the courts. No new visas issued to anyone.

    Liked by 9 people

    • That just might be where he’s headed!

      Like

    • Larry Ivy says:

      I asked that earlier, this may stay cancellation of issued VISAs but how can the courts force him to issue new visas from any country when he controls the criteria and issuance ?
      I guess I don’t understand the nuances of the EO and what they stay does. Other than them getting their employees in, how does this allow VISAs to be passed out like candy ?

      Like

  8. spacette55 says:

    Trump’s EO probably saved us from a YUUUGE Terrorist attack at the Super Bowl yesterday.

    Executive Order Leads to Capture of ISIS Leader, Rasheed Muhammad

    Muhammad, 32, was questioned due to the heightened security measures that resulted from the presidential executive order. The suspect attempted to enter the country with a tourist visa and claimed to be visiting family in order to attend this year’s Super Bowl LI.
    http://times.com.mx/executive-order-leads-to-capture-of-isis-leader-rasheed-muhammad/

    Liked by 8 people

  9. Rachelle says:

    ‘Chaos’ isn’t a legal argument.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. don welch says:

    i say hold it back until gorsuch gets onto the scotus. unless/before that happens there is no chance. zero.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. oldgrunt68 says:

    Please Trump, hire Dirshowitz as your WH assistant lawyer and listen to him…..he is giving good advice right now……you don’t have to obey this judges order.

    Liked by 2 people

  12. NJF says:

    Haven’t watched much news today, but i put it on a little while ago. New meme: POTUS has roughly 3 hours to prepare their arguments before the 9th circuit.

    SMH…..click.

    Like

  13. andymilken says:

    Interesting analysis of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) from previous administrations- https://fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R44743.pdf. Guess who is the top “enforcer”, in terms of the total and per year basis?

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Wayne Robinson says:

    Yates has cooked her own goose. She obviously isn’t smart enough to be in that position. Her schooling apparently wasn’t all that good. She may think there is 58 states in the union , not counting Hawaii. Her resume sucks . She had a great job all she had to do is her job not rattle her empty head. If Trump would let her stay , it would turn out the same way as if he gave Romney a great job. Trump would just have to fire both of them again later. This lady at least shows she is aware of her fault. Kinda vague lawyer speak ( due to unforeseen circumstances) name em now Yates . Your claiming good eye site now . When you transgress before all repent be for all. Name the circumstance / do you think this statement is communication? Unforeseen circumstances such bull shit. I want her to say what the circumstances were that justifies what she did. There isn’t any . Which means she is not accepting responsibility for her actions ( something else is responsible) another one bites the dust. Nomatter what doors open to her for her faithfulness to the demons she will never be allowed to enter where she possibly could , if she just had enough since to recognize the winds of change or principle of authority. Anyone who disagrees with Trump should be smart enough to reach out to him for clarification or concerns and not try to sow decent and foment rebellion. She will try to outlive her shame but I don’t think it will work . She went the wrong way on purpose.

    Liked by 2 people

  15. youme says:

    Here is a complete list of the companies who signed the State of Washington brief opposing Trump, in alphabetical order:

    AdRoll, Inc. 2. Aeris Communications, Inc. 3. Airbnb, Inc. 4. AltSchool, PBC 5. Ancestry.com, LLC 6. Appboy, Inc. 7. Apple Inc. 8. AppNexus Inc. 9. Asana, Inc. 10. Atlassian Corp Plc 11. Autodesk, Inc. 12. Automattic Inc. 13. Box, Inc. 14. Brightcove Inc. 15. Brit + Co 16. CareZone Inc. 17. Castlight Health 18. Checkr, Inc.
    Chobani, LLC 20. Citrix Systems, Inc. 21. Cloudera, Inc. 22. Cloudflare, Inc. 23. Copia Institute 24. DocuSign, Inc. 25. DoorDash, Inc. 26. Dropbox, Inc. 27. Dynatrace LLC 28. eBay Inc. 29. Engine Advocacy 30. Etsy Inc. 31. Facebook, Inc. 32. Fastly, Inc. 33. Flipboard, Inc. 34. Foursquare Labs, Inc. 35. Fuze, Inc. 36. General Assembly 37. GitHub 38. Glassdoor, Inc. 39. Google Inc. 40. GoPro, Inc. 41. Harmonic Inc. 42. Hipmunk, Inc. 43. Indiegogo, Inc.44. Intel Corporation 45. JAND, Inc. d/b/a Warby Parker 46. Kargo Global, Inc.47. Kickstarter, PBC 48. KIND, LLC 49. Knotel 50. Levi Strauss & Co. 51. LinkedIn Corporation 52. Lithium Technologies, Inc. 53. Lyft, Inc. 54. Mapbox, Inc. 55. Maplebear Inc. d/b/a Instacart 56. Marin Software Incorporated 57. Medallia, Inc. 58. A Medium Corporation 59. Meetup, Inc. 60. Microsoft Corporation 61. Motivate International Inc. 62. Mozilla Corporation 63. Netflix, Inc. 64. NETGEAR, Inc. 65. NewsCred, Inc. 66. Patreon, Inc. 67. PayPal Holdings, Inc. 68. Pinterest, Inc. 69. Quora, Inc. 70. Reddit, Inc. 71. Rocket Fuel Inc. 72. SaaStr Inc. 73. Salesforce.com, Inc. 74. Scopely, Inc. 75. Shutterstock, Inc. 76. Snap Inc. 77. Spokeo, Inc. 78. Spotify USA Inc. 79. Square, Inc. 80. Squarespace, Inc. 81. Strava, Inc. 82. Stripe, Inc. 83. SurveyMonkey Inc. 84. TaskRabbit, Inc 85. Tech:NYC 86. Thumbtack, Inc. 87. Turn Inc. 88. Twilio Inc. 89. Twitter Inc. 90. Turn Inc. 91. Uber Technologies, Inc. 92. Via 93. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 94. Workday 95. Y Combinator Management, LLC 96. Yelp Inc. 97. Zynga Inc.

    You can search each company here and find most of them employ foreigners brought to the U.S.

    http://www.jobsintech.io/immigration_companies#name=&city=&state=&page=0

    Liked by 3 people

  16. Howie says:

    This afternoon would be perfect for declaring the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization.

    Liked by 2 people

  17. Concerned says:

    “chaos”? That was already debunked. What a bunch of drama queens. The only chaos was Mark Zuckerberg wondering how he’s going to pay market rate when for so many years he’s had cheap slave labor.

    Liked by 2 people

  18. Texian says:

    The last time this happened it caused a Civil War..

    In briefs filed early Monday morning with the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Washington state and Minnesota said Lincoln’s slavery ban harmed residents, businesses and universities and was unconstitutional.

    ‘Dozens of plantation owners, including giants like Apple, Google, and Uber, are siding with Washington state as it fights President Abraham Lincoln’s ban on slavery and importers from seven predominantly African countries from entering the United States.

    The companies filed briefs late Sunday with a federal appellate court saying the Lincoln executive order hurts their businesses by making it harder to import slaves. The companies also said the slavery ban would prompt businesses to build operations outside the United States.’

    I’m through coddling with these “high tech” plantation owners.. Let’s invade and burn down the plantation mansions in Washington State, Minnesota and California.. and any other State that dares to maintain H1b slavery..

    Liked by 8 people

  19. youme says:

    “The State of New York, together with the States California, Connecticut,
    Delaware, Iowa, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island,
    and Vermont, the Commonwealths of Massachusetts, Pennsyvania, and Virginia,
    and the District of Columbia submit this brief as amici curiae in support of appellees
    the States of Washington and Minnesota.”
    https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3455308/9th-State-AGs-In-Support-of-Washington.pdf

    The NY AG does not know how to spell Pennslyvania

    Like

  20. David says:

    Trump admin is going to lose

    Purpose of the TRO is to preserve the status quo pending a trial on the merits

    Trump admin would have to show an imminent concrete particularized injury would result from not immediately reinstating the travel ban.

    Trump admin has zero evidence of that

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Howie says:

    Fact. The Founders put life terms for federal judges in the constitution before the Marbury v Madison judicial review was invented by SCOTUS,

    Like

    • Kroesus says:

      only judges the FFs empaneled are SCOTUS……the US Constitution gives the power of further court determination to CONGRESS…..it is a wonderful document you should read sometime in the future before commenting

      Like

  22. truthandjustice says:

    I don’t have to be knowledgeable about laws, courts, etc. to know that they will not rule for Pres. Trump. All you need to know is human nature, facts about political games/history, who are the corrupt, traitorous ones and their agendas. That all says what Laura Ingraham said is true and more than likely. It’s a no brainer. They want it to go to the Supreme Court before Gorsuch is sitting there and rule it unconstitutional, which is false, just like other issues in the past.
    Trying to get anything and everything done to hurt/stop Pres. Trump no matter what it takes or how much credibility they lose, etc.just like the other tools – the media.
    We must get these activist judges/courts dealt with or removed. I read where the Constitution does not require them anyway so that tells me, if true, they are just another means to get the left’s agenda accomplished. There are so many unconstitutional laws and actions that have been made over all these years.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Sandra says:

      Just keep in mind that right now the appeals court is only reviewing the temporary restraining order, not the travel ban. I think David (in a comment above) is right, Trump would need to make an extraordinary case for them to intervene at this stage. If they don’t, Robart will decide. I think he has two weeks. If he decides against Trump then Trump can appeal and move upward through the courts. Ultimately Trump can prevail but the delay will no doubt allow an endless stream of people into the country who we were hoping to ban. Hopefully the agents at the airports will be vigilent, they can still turn people away even if Trump’s executive order is on hold.

      Like

  23. NJF says:

    So nothing???

    Like

  24. mossback says:

    Sit back and wait…….the President has something up his sleeve that no one here is aware of I surmise…………The President is not a stupid bumbling progressive…..he is one of the smartest men ever to take this job…..just wait.

    Liked by 2 people

    • WeThePeople2016 says:

      I was just thinking the same thing. I keep hearing that the 9th Circuit will rule against President Trump and then they will appeal to the Supreme Court. It will then be a 4-4 tie, and then the lower court ruling stands. That means Trump would lose and it would put the country into a Constitutional crisis.

      This just seems to quick to me. Does anyone not think that Trump and his team have mapped out every possible scenario on this and will have a response ready to go? Do you really think that Trump would have issued the EO so early without Sessions in place and take the risk of all of this if he and his team were not ready and prepared? If you think that, then you have not read “The Art of the Deal.”

      Liked by 3 people

      • mimbler says:

        If we lose in the 9th, I wonder how long we can delay appealing to let a full 9 judge court hear it,
        Mike

        Like

        • Sandra says:

          It’s my understanding that there are two opportunities for the appeals court. In this first opportunity tomorrow they are merely reviewing the TRO. If they decide to not intervene then Robart gets to complete his process and issue a decision. Then Trump can appeal and it will go back up to the appeals court again, and possibly up to the Supreme Court. Tomorrow is just about Robart’s TRO, not the travel ban itself.

          Liked by 1 person

      • HarryJ says:

        Support is great, blind support is even better but rarely helpful. Sometimes you need constructive criticism. I mentioned in post earlier today that Trump rushed this thing early and should have planned better. Specifically, not smart without a favorable justice dept.

        Like

        • Sandra says:

          The DOJ reviewed his executive order and said it was legal. Trump deliberately chose the 7 countries identified by Obama. But hey, the Dems don’t give up easily. They wil fight everything and anything Trump comes up with. Robart issued the temporary restraining order without supplying a good reason. What can anyone do when an activist judge temporarily halts even the most well-thought out and well-planned executive order?

          Like

  25. Joan says:

    Here is an excellent article from Breitbart on what Robert did not stop in President Trump’s EO: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/02/06/seattle-judge-not-stop-50000-limit-refugees/

    Like

  26. BakoCarl says:

    I am ignorant of the basics of INA law and, of course, any details . . . HOWEVER –

    INA Sec. 212. [8 U.S.C. 1182] (f) Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

    Whenever the President finds . . .
    (Determination made by President)

    He may by proclamation . . .
    (Proclaimed by President)

    . . . for such period as he may deem necessary . . .
    (Duration by President)

    . . . suspend the entry of all aliens or class of aliens . . .
    (Alien “group” determined by President)

    . . . or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.
    (Restriction determined by President)

    Where in this law is any room at all for the President to be accountable to any person, judge, or review panel for the justification for the action, the duration of the action, the class of the alien(s), or the nature of the restriction?

    Liked by 3 people

  27. tommyd22 says:

    So the time has come where we find out if there is any integrity in the courts or if they have degenerated into political lawlessness..
    If the 9th circuit throws the constitution out the window then there is a good case for civil war..
    And I do mean a shooting war.

    Like

    • Howie says:

      POTUS has delivered a simple 10 page reply to the foolishness. He is giving the lunatics a chance to be legally correct as opposed to politically correct. I doubt they will take this opportunity he has so graciously extended. Even these social justice lawyers imbedded in the 9th circuit may have a few moments of legal lucidity and quash the TRO. They may be too lost in Bat Territory though.

      Like

      • Sandra says:

        If, as I have read in several places, Judge Robart didn’t actually explain why he implemented a TRO … can the appeals court cancel it because it was unjustified or had no legal basis?

        Like

        • Howie says:

          Yes they can. That would require them to apply the law to the facts of the case in an impartial manner. However, sadly, they may be too far gone in to Bat Territory to be rational at this point.

          Like

  28. AS IF Libya, Syria, etc. are coming to work for Google, Microsoft, etc.
    Give me a frikin break!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Howie says:

      I like the state of Hawaii brief. They are whining about the loss of revenue because tourists from Syria, Yemen, and Libya are barred for a couple months. We should try to refrain from splitting our sides from laughing at these snowflake liberals. It is uncouth to make fun of the mentally disabled.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Sandra says:

        At the Robart hearing the Washington attorney actually said that the University of Washington will be deprived of tuition. Like this is more important than a President’s decision regarding national security. I might be wrong here but what the university can do is just offer the open spot to someone else.

        Like

        • Howie says:

          They have already collected tuition for this term. You are thinking in rational terms. We are dealing with lunatic liberal moonbats here.

          Like

  29. aredtailblog says:

    So now we have to wait until tomorrow for the answer. Oy.

    Like

    • Sandra says:

      But if we don’t prevail tomorrow there’s still hope, it’s just a temporary setback caused by activist judge Robart. He knew what he was doing. Did someone buy him a $600k vacation home yet?

      Like

  30. Sandra says:

    We’d better get used to this, everyone. This is the new normal. The Dems are going to fight EVERYTHING Trump does. They will use their activist judges and every other tool to prevent Trump from succeeding. It’s going to be like this for his entire two terms. 🙂

    Like

    • Larry Ivy says:

      And the Administration needs to be better prepared and advised. Sorry, the best legal advice in the country is available here and Trump sent a unarmed person to a knife fight.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s