Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Trump's order on immigration and the wacko liberal response
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


(2)
Message 962 of 993 (812618)
06-18-2017 11:21 AM
Reply to: Message 960 by Faith
06-17-2017 7:16 PM


This is the response I wanted to give
I didn't really like my previous response. In the interests of honesty and openness, I didn't eliminate it; I've hidden the text in case anyone wants to read it and reply to it.
What I should have said is this:
When I see a response like the one you just gave, I don't know what to make of it. I don't know whether you're just ranting out of frustration, or whether you really do think that I literally believe what you said I believe.
I also don't know whether you're trying to provoke a similar response from me, or whether you're trying to end the conversation but don't want to give me the last word.
I am a bit disappointed that you don't feel that I'm worth your time or effort. But fair enough; there are people I don't feel are worth my time, either, so I can't complain.
-
Edited by Chiroptera, : No reason given.
Edited by Chiroptera, : edited the hidden part
Edited by Chiroptera, : Last visible paragraph disappeared in the last edit somehow. Grr.

Freedom is merely privilege extended, unless enjoyed by one and all. — Billy Bragg

This message is a reply to:
 Message 960 by Faith, posted 06-17-2017 7:16 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 963 by Faith, posted 06-18-2017 2:54 PM Chiroptera has seen this message but not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 991 of 993 (813327)
06-26-2017 11:24 AM


Supreme Court partially lifts Trumps travel ban injunction
In breaking news, the US Supreme Court has agreed to hear the legality and constitutionality of Trump's travel ban.
Supreme Court revives Trump travel ban order
The Supreme Court on Monday handed a victory to President Donald Trump by allowing his temporary bans on travelers from six Muslim-majority countries and all refugees to go into effect for people with no connection to the United States while agreeing to hear his appeals in the closely watched legal fight.
...
The Supreme Court left the lower-court injunctions against the ban in place, but only with respect to the challengers to the ban themselves and others in similar circumstances, meaning they involve people in the United States who have relationships with foreign nationals abroad and whose rights might be affected if those foreigners were excluded from entry.
This is a temporary measure until the Supreme Court actually hears and rules on the case, but my understanding is that decisions about injunctions often give a sense about how a court will eventually rule.
Edited by Chiroptera, : Typo in title.

Freedom is merely privilege extended, unless enjoyed by one and all. — Billy Bragg

Replies to this message:
 Message 992 by NoNukes, posted 06-27-2017 7:08 PM Chiroptera has seen this message but not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 993 of 993 (835646)
06-26-2018 7:44 PM


Supreme Court upholds Trump's Muslim ban
From the New York Times
In a 5-to-4 vote, the court’s conservatives said that the president’s power to secure the country’s borders, delegated by Congress over decades of immigration lawmaking, was not undermined by Mr. Trump’s history of incendiary statements about the dangers he said Muslims pose to the United States.
Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said that Mr. Trump had ample statutory authority to make national security judgments in the realm of immigration. And the chief justice rejected a constitutional challenge to Mr. Trump’s third executive order on the matter, issued in September as a proclamation.
The court’s liberals denounced the decision. In a passionate and searing dissent from the bench, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the decision was no better than Korematsu v. United States, the 1944 decision that endorsed the detention of Japanese-Americans during World War II.


What do you despise? By this are you truly known. -- Frank Herbert

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024