9th Circuit has ruled AGAINST Trump, order blocking the ban remains in place


#1

9th Circuit has ruled AGAINST Trump, order blocking the ban remains in place

twitter.com/BraddJaffy/status/829830135461322752

Not a surprise if you listened to oral arguments yesterday.

details coming…

US appeals court refuses to reinstate Trump’s ban on travelers from seven Muslim-majority nations.


#2

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:


#3

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has denied the government’s motion for an emergency stay of a temporary restraining order in Washington v. Trump, regarding the President’s executive order banning entry into the United States from seven majority-Muslim countries. The court’s decision is available here and is also included below.

lawfareblog.com/9th-circuit-denies-stay-temporary-restraining-order-trump-travel-ban-case

The ruling is pretty detailed and available at the link

Basically they are telling the litigants to fight it out in court and the stay stands until the lower court decides the outcome.

Unanimous decision, including Republican appointee.

“The case is almost undoubtedly heading to the Supreme Court”; travel ban remains on hold after 9th Circuit decision cbsn.ws/1UJwwDb

Except the ban changed so the case is changing I suspect. The States are alleging it is a ban on religion though and that part of their case I guess stays.


#4

Politically this isn’t a loss for Trump. When the next terrorist attack comes, he will gain hugely and leftists will be hurt hugely.


#5

Politically it is hard to say if it is a loss or not. But if I had to side on one side or another, I must agree with you, I don’t see it as a loss for Trump. At least not today.


#6

Nothing works like fear huh?


#7

In politics and diplomacy, sure, fear is a much larger motivator than hope. Obama sold hope and he was basically used and misused by everyone around him. Facts of life.


#8

Ruling is not decision on ban’s merits; it keeps temporary restraining order suspending travel ban in place cbsn.ws/2kU3UNo


#9

I agree with you


#10

New tweet from Trump:

SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!

twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/829836231802515457

He likes a good fight. But the solicitor he had representing the US was very weak during oral arguments.


#11

I believe the outcome in the District Court is pretty much a foregone conclusion. I think this is what most everybody expected, despite the contrary opinions of the District Court judge in Boston and even liberal Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz. But the Ninth Circuit is a political court almost certain to rule against public safety in favor of ideology.

Inasmuch as the District Court judge is going to rule against the government almost no matter what, I think the influx of terrorists claiming refugee status is going to be very heavy in the next few months, maybe indefinitely.

But perhaps the most infuriating thing to me is that, while Obama favored Muslim immigration over Christians who really are being persecuted mercilessly, the Ninth Circuit rejected the government’s effort to favor them and others after all this time of them being discriminated against, thus reinforcing Obama’s policy and forcing it on Trump.


#12

Really random question but how long do you think it takes for anyone to come into the US like a refugee?


#13

He is someone who cannot take rejection or criticism well. Like a child whom always gets what they want by throwing a tantrum.


#14

Mr. Trump’s ban was not allowing Christians or other persecuted minorities from the seven Muslim majority countries to enter the US:

A Syrian Christian Orthodox family was turned back from Philadelphia International Airport after traveling to the United States from Lebanon, airport sources in Beirut said on Sunday.

The family of six were denied entry under U.S. President Donald Trump’s new ban on nationals of seven Muslim-majority countries, including Syria, and flew back to Lebanon via Doha, the sources said.

reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-immigration-syria-lebanon-idUSKBN15D0R3

The only female Yazidi MP in Iraq’s parliament, who mobilised the world against Islamic State’s assault on her people, is unable to travel to the US to accept a human rights awards under Donald Trump’s visa ban.

telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/31/isils-most-wanted-woman-yazidi-mp-banned-collecting-award-us/


#15

Everyone knows Trump’s stance. And the left is already hypocritical because many of them want to expand the ban for I guess revenge for 9-11 or something, which is interesting because for the last 8 years all I heard was how Islamic terror was some kind of myth. :shrug:

So yes, if there is another terror attack, President Trump has washed his hands of any responsibility.

That’s the price the American people and the organizations for this could pay.

If there is another 9-11 there will be lots of crying, screaming and I suspect more one-liners for Ann Coulter. But terror attacks also happen in areas where Democrats live. If the right really were as mean as they say, they would allow blue districts to be vulnerable to everything from terror to violence to drugs.

I’m still impressed and amazed that so many Trump-oriented republicans on this issue have shown such great care for their fellow citizens even though it may cost them politically, socially ect.

They and those who stand with them against the liberal, unconstitutional, anti-life courts are to be commended.


#16

It’s not a ban, it’s a moratorium. And it was started by Barack H. Obama.

I stand with President Trump on this and would have stood by President Obama had I know he was doing it, too!


#17

What Trump might do is a ban on all refugees until the congress makes a law about the refugees. Proper vetting and how many can USA afford? And why priority from the Muslim states, there are so many other countries in trouble…


#18

Let’s just pass over the idea there is any Trump supporter out there anywhere who is salivating at the idea that Trump will “gain hugely” by an act of death or destruction perpetrated in the US by some terrorist, because, well, that’s just disgusting and of course no Trump supporter is so black-hearted and frankly sociopathic that they’d ever say that such an event “isn’t a loss” for anyone, including the very caring and empathetic President of the United States, of all people.

Look up how many terrorists have done what harm to US citizens that came from these two countries: Iran and Somalia.

Now, look up the harm done by terrorists from a few Muslim-majority countries unaffected by the ban, namely: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Kyrgyzstan, Kuwait, Nigeria, Afghanistan, Lebanon and Guinea.

Now, class, list the acts of terror perpetrated in the US in the last 15 years (that is, since 9-11) by terrorists sent from these five countries: Iraq, Libya, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.

It isn’t the people from those seven countries who are going to attack us. Why? Because, hello, they have a war going on at home to fight. It is their ideology that is most likely to pose a threat to us, and it can still get here just fine over the internet.

Meanwhile, at least one infant has been able to slip through Mr. Trump’s defenses in order to get heart surgery in Oregon. She could have died because of this ban.


#19

By moratorium, do you mean a ban of limited duration? What is the expiration date on the Trump order? I have not heard of one. Sounds like a ban to me, then.

The two Presidents were doing different things. That is why travel from the countries affected by President Obama’s orders was never halted altogether, as was the case for Trump’s proposed ban.


#20

Oh, that is just wonderful.

Trump is turning out to be the biggest benefactor the ACLU ever had. Why shouldn’t we all be thrilled about that?


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.