Supreme Court Rejects Request to Stay Lower Court Ruling on Asylum Ban – Judge Roberts Sides With Liberal Justices…

Somehow, despite 85-year-old Justice Ginsburg being incapacitated by surgery and intensive care recovery, the supreme court voted 5-4 to allow a lower court block on President Trump’s asylum restrictions to remain in place.  Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the three resistance activists and the unknown puppeteer for Ginsburg.

WASHINGTON (AP) — A divided Supreme Court won’t let the Trump administration begin enforcing a ban on asylum for any immigrants who illegally cross the U.S.-Mexico border.

Chief Justice John Roberts joined his four more liberal colleagues Friday in ruling against the administration in the very case in which President Donald Trump had derided the “Obama judge” who first blocked the asylum policy.

New Justice Brett Kavanaugh and three other conservative justices sided with the administration.  There were no opinions explaining either side’s votes.  (read more)

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Decepticons, Deep State, DHS, Illegal Aliens, media bias, propaganda, Refugees, Supreme Court, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

402 Responses to Supreme Court Rejects Request to Stay Lower Court Ruling on Asylum Ban – Judge Roberts Sides With Liberal Justices…

  1. Maquis says:

    Screw the “Swing Vote,” Roberts is the “Stab Vote.”

    Liked by 7 people

    • My thoughts exactly. His unconservative magnum opus was his opinion on Obamacare. I knew then that we were in deep kimchee with his vote. Hopefully, RBG will step down soon (one way or another) and POTUS can appoint another Gorsuch or Kavanaugh type conservative.

      Liked by 1 person

    • son of liberty says:

      Roberts is not a conservative but simply a hack in the pay of globalist oligarchs and proven enemy of We the People. He needs to be sent to Gitmo where he can be held accountable for his crimes against the American people.

      Like

    • vincentcuomo says:

      I guess Judges run the country now; I think we should put the asylum seekers in or next to the homes of all the judges who voted for this plan!

      Like

  2. J-Mac says:

    If Justice Roberts is compromised by the “Deep State” this needs to be exposed.

    Surely the NSA can determine this?

    Liked by 5 people

    • red6242 says:

      They could but they along with the FBI, DOJ and CIA are compromised also so that is the last thing they will do. They will however help the deep state keep attacking Trump and us.

      Liked by 2 people

    • cali says:

      @J=Mac: ^^^^^^^^This!

      He re-called the Strzok/Page FISA court judge and staying under the radar. I wonder what Hussein and Brennan held over his head to change his vote for Obamacare AFTER the he the fact.
      As I’ve said before his disapproval of president Trump is unbecoming to a chief justice of the SC.
      I would not be surprised if he were to retire due to a family emergency.

      Like

  3. Brant says:

    Unlike George HW and the senator from Arizona, I doubt we will hear about RBG’s room temperature status until several months after the fact.

    Liked by 4 people

  4. bob says:

    forget kennedy. john Roberts is the new Souter. he is as phony as anything I’ve ever seen. the senate needs to start impeaching these judges when they lie to get on the court.

    Liked by 6 people

  5. PVCDroid says:

    We need her to croak real soon. If not, I can foresee Roberts siding with Mueller in a split decision for some bs Trump subpoena indictment showdown.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Jan says:

      Is there not one honest journalist who will investigate Justice Roberts??? OVomitcare, the FISA court abuse, his public criticism of the President (along with RGB’s), the not-so mysterious death of Justice Scalia,…. Cannot someone investigate this man to find out where this betrayal of our Constitution is coming from??? What does the Deep State have on him? In today’s scandalous DC, what’s the matter with adopting kids illegally–unless you’re using them in a pedophile ring???

      Doesn’t anyone care that people are paying these illegals to come here to defy our laws and suck us taxpayers dry? Supreme Court Justices get body guard and protection. We do not.

      Like

  6. Zippy says:

    Liked by 2 people

  7. VSparrow says:

    I don’t know if Roberts’ recent egregious decisions are politically motivated or strictly personal now. It appears that he’s become a staunch anti Trumpist who will not tolerate anyone esp. Trump publicly criticizing the judiciary or any Judge. Does Robert’s believe all that all judges in America are not to be criticized by either the inferior and petulant masses or an inferior President who does not have an exclusive lifetime appointment like him?

    Chief Justice Robert’s latest decisions indicate that he believes he’s the most powerful and important person in the USA and not just the supreme leader of a “coequal branch of gov’t.” This increasingly pompous and detached court is supposed to be the “guardian and interpreter of the Constitution” but the “Big Five” are acting more like a new cliquish alliance that despise Trump and believe the Constitution is just an old outdated irrelevant parchment and that their “progressive” personal and political biases should guide their decisions far more. What is best outcome for the neighborhoods of America is of no concern to this elite protected body.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Sundance needs to learn to count. (1) The reason NO Opinion was issued is because it had already been decided [BEFORE] Ruth “Busy” Bader Ginsburg was Hospitalized. 5-4 Vote = 9.
    Ginsburg + Roberts + Sotomayor + Breyer + Kagan = 5
    Thomas + Alito + Gorsuch + Kavanaugh = 4
    Who is the “Ginsburg Puppeteer”–>Her Law Clerks : Kathryn Barber, Rachel Bayefsky, Rebecca Lee & Matthew Rubenstein, of Course

    Liked by 1 person

    • Bro Mo says:

      Also lost in this hyperventilating, if I am reading it correctly (AP and usual sources are their dreadfully ignorant and misleading selves – you have to read quite deep to see the quotes from ACLU of all people to get the correct hint)…. The vote was whether to HEAR the case without appellates first weighing in, which is the normal path for constitutional questions working their way up from lower courts.

      The admin asked them to skip appellate due to its urgency (which is possible like with Bush/Gore, but rare) and the vote was whether to do so or not, that appears to be all. It was not a constitutional rejection of the asylum ban. This does not mean that it will not eventually reach the SC, nor does it mean the vote will be the same.

      Like

  9. shirley49 says:

    I suspect that he received a call from an Obama minion who reminded him of what Obama had on him when he forced him to pass the unconstitutional Obamacare bill. He should vacate the Supreme Court.

    Like

  10. sDee says:

    The Supreme Court vote is owned by the globalists.

    Roberts met privately with President-elect Barack Obama’s before his inauguration. Who knows if it was a deal or a threat. Roberts’ fumbling of the oath of office led to a closed door re-do. He was key in refusing jus-sanguines challenge to Obama’s eligibility and key to upholding Obamacare.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Disgusted says:

      Please correct whatever it should say here as a challenge of Obama’s eligibility? I had no idea such a thing existed. Don’t get what is typed here. Thank you, Disgusted

      Like

  11. Tommylotto says:

    Our comfort level to a SCOUTS nomination should be inversely proportional to the Dems reaction to him. I call it the Alito test. Unless they make his wife cry, he cannot be trusted. Robert’s confirmation was a uni-party love fest. Explain to me how that should be reassuring.

    Like

  12. thedoc00 says:

    Read the court documents on Powerline. Roberts essentially authorized court shopping and creating laws from the bench to continue. Further he is allowing courts to making rulings not based on law but on political lines. Gee, President Trump was right again. The author in this summary sites no law supporting the decision by the 9th, thus there is only one conclusion.

    The rest of the logic explaining Robert’s logic as wanting the full case to be completed until the final opinions are written is a coward’s excuse not to recognize the illegal activism of the 9th court in this case.

    Like

  13. Zippy says:

    SOUTER IN ROBERTS’ CLOTHING
    Ann Coulter – July 20, 2005

    http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2005-07-20.html

    Excerpts:

    So all we know about him for sure is that he can’t dance and he probably doesn’t know who Jay-Z is. Other than that, he is a blank slate. Tabula rasa. Big zippo. Nada. Oh, yeah … We also know he’s argued cases before the Supreme Court. Big deal; so has Larry Flynt’s attorney.

    But unfortunately, other than that that, we don’t know much about John Roberts. Stealth nominees have never turned out to be a pleasant surprise for conservatives. Never. Not ever.

    Since the announcement, court-watchers have been like the old Kremlinologists from Soviet days looking for clues as to what kind of justice Roberts will be.

    It means absolutely nothing that NARAL and Planned Parenthood attack him: They also attacked Sandra Day O’Connor, Anthony Kennedy and David Hackett Souter.

    The only way a Supreme Court nominee could win the approval of NARAL and Planned Parenthood would be to actually perform an abortion during his confirmation hearing, live, on camera, and preferably a partial-birth one.

    It means nothing that Roberts wrote briefs arguing for the repeal of Roe v. Wade when he worked for Republican administrations. He was arguing on behalf of his client, the United States of America. Roberts has specifically disassociated himself from those cases, dropping a footnote to a 1994 law review article that said:

    “In the interest of full disclosure, the author would like to point out that as Deputy Solicitor General for a portion of the 1992-’93 term, he was involved in many of the cases discussed below. In the interest of even fuller disclosure, he would also like to point out that his views as a commentator on those cases do not necessarily reflect his views as an advocate for his former client, the United States.”

    This would have been the legal equivalent, after O.J.’s acquittal, of Johnnie Cochran saying: “Hey, I never said the guy was innocent. I was just doing my job.”

    And it makes no difference that conservatives in the White House are assuring us Roberts can be trusted. We got the exact same assurances from officials working for the last president Bush about David Hackett Souter.

    I believe their exact words were, “Read our lips; Souter’s a reliable conservative.”

    From the theater of the absurd category, the Republican National Committee’s “talking points” on Roberts provide this little tidbit:

    “In the 1995 case of Barry v. Little, Judge Roberts argued — free of charge –before the D.C. Court of Appeals on behalf of a class of the neediest welfare recipients, challenging a termination of benefits under the District’s Public Assistance Act of 1982.”

    I’m glad to hear the man has a steady work record, but how did this make it to the top of his resume?

    Finally, let’s ponder the fact that Roberts has gone through 50 years on this planet without ever saying anything controversial. That’s just unnatural. By contrast, I held out for three months, tops, before dropping my first rhetorical bombshell, which I think was about Agnew.

    It’s especially unnatural for someone who is smart, and there’s no question but that Roberts is smart. If a smart and accomplished person goes this long without expressing an opinion, he’d better be pursuing the Miss America title.

    Apparently, Roberts decided early on that he wanted to be on the Supreme Court and that the way to do that was not to express a personal opinion on anything to anybody ever. It’s as if he is from some space alien sleeper cell. Maybe the space aliens are trying to help us, but I wish we knew that.

    If the Senate were in Democrat hands, Roberts would be perfect. But why on earth would Bush waste a nomination on a person who is a complete blank slate when we have a majority in the Senate! We also have a majority in the House, state legislatures, state governorships, and have won five of the last seven presidential elections — seven of the last 10!

    Liked by 1 person

  14. NJ Transplant says:

    It sure looks like someone has something on Justice Roberts.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. npc #9876 says:

    I’m worried Roberts is becoming the new Justice Souter.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. RED-PILL says:

    Of course those under foreign influence will always vote against our constitutional republic. Roberts is owned by the fascist papacy and they need those illegal and largely bible ignorant roman citizens to illegally vote the same. Read “Fifty Years in the Church of Rome” by Chiniquay and you will see in Lincoln’s own words the true causes of the last civil war. Same group of rebels behind this trouble today. John Roberts wants his Communion and when needed last rights so he doesn’t end up in make believe pergatory…same way in which the kings and queens of europe were held by Rome’s lying influence during the dark ages. There is good reason why the United States does not have a King nor a Pope to dictate fascist globalism…our founding fathers were wise to the dragon’s influence.

    Like

  17. CNY3 says:

    Justice Roberts is a lying POC. He is even MORE political than the most blatant political RBG.

    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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s