Breaking: Supreme Court Permits Trump's Travel Ban

[Saucy]

The Supreme Court announced Monday that it will permit the full enforcement of President Trump's controversial travel ban.

Supreme Court permits full enforcement of Trump travel ban

I think this settles the issue once and for all.

 

[paul1149]

Appears to only affect immigration based on a "bona fide" relationship with someone in the US. The ban evidently is still being attacked on other grounds.

 

[AirPo]

Supreme Court permits full enforcement of Trump travel ban

I think this settles the issue once and for all.

All it took was right wing activists judges.

 

[Saucy]

Appears to only affect immigration based on a "bona fide" relationship with someone in the US. The ban evidently is still being attacked on other grounds.

Full enforcement of the law was granted.

 

[Saucy]

All it took was right wing activists judges.

Or maybe it was the left-wing activist judges who take #resist way too seriously and blocked Trump's 100% legal law out of bias and spite.

 

[paul1149]

Full enforcement of the law was granted.

Until the next challenge might be successful.

 

[Saucy]

Until the next challenge might be successful.

I didn't think you could challenge the Supreme Court.

 

[paul1149]

I didn't think you could challenge the Supreme Court.

Please explain this excerpt from the article you linked to:

The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, will be holding arguments on the legality of the ban this week.

Both courts are dealing with the issue on an accelerated basis, and the Supreme Court noted it expects those courts to reach decisions "with appropriate dispatch."

Quick resolutions by appellate courts would allow the Supreme Court to hear and decide the issue this term, by the end of June.​

 

[He is Risen 72]

Yes! Yes! Praise the Risen Lord Jesus Christ! God it truly working through President Trump! Praise Jesus! Next we need to start rounding all the Terrorists that are already hear because of the lax and pro Muslim immigration policies under the past administration of Barrack Hussein Obama!

 

[Saucy]

Please explain this excerpt from the article you linked to:

The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia, will be holding arguments on the legality of the ban this week.

Both courts are dealing with the issue on an accelerated basis, and the Supreme Court noted it expects those courts to reach decisions "with appropriate dispatch."

Quick resolutions by appellate courts would allow the Supreme Court to hear and decide the issue this term, by the end of June.​

I didn't write the article. The rest of that information wasn't there when I posted it. It was more of a breaking news alert that they added more details to later. From what I saw, it said the Supreme Court had decided to allow full enforcement of the travel ban.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

All it took was right wing activists judges.

Sore loser much? It wasn't Trump's idea to take this to the courts.

It is precisely because the judges were not being activist that you are displeased. Rather than legislative from the bench, the court allowed the executive to exercise its constitutional authority.

 

[paul1149]

The rest of that information wasn't there when I posted it

And what do you think of the status of the ban now?

 

[Rion]

All it took was right wing activists judges.

???

Just two justices, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor, noted their disagreement with court orders allowing the latest policy to take full effect.

So everyone else is a right-winger?

 

[Steve Petersen]

It wasn't even close: a seven to two vote. Now who is going to scream 'political activism?'

 

[LivingWordUnity]

 

[Saucy]

And what do you think of the status of the ban now?

I think, as everyone else has mentioned, only two judges were against it. It will stand. Trump has a constitutional right to make the law as president. It's a law a lot of people agree with, and it's only temporary. There's no reason to oppose it unless you're actively trying to derail Trump's agenda, but that won't hold up in a court of law.

 

[Nithavela]

Wasn't the point of the ban to stop the immigration until they "know what is going on"?

 

[Rion]

Wasn't the point of the ban to stop the immigration until they "know what is going on"?

I think the ban is already expired, IIRC. This is more about the legality of the thing.

 

[brinny]

Supreme Court permits full enforcement of Trump travel ban

I think this settles the issue once and for all.

Praise God!!!!

God BLESS America!!!!

Woooo Hooooo!!!!!

Praying!!!!

 

[RC1970]

Supreme Court permits full enforcement of Trump travel ban

I think this settles the issue once and for all.

This only effects the temporary ban. There are other court cases working their way through the system.

The constitution and current law give the president wide discretion on who is let into the country. I don't see how any of the current cases have any merit given the constitutional situation.

A person simply has no absolute legal right to be in this country unless they are a citizen.