Trump travel ban: 'President must honour ruling'


#1

President Donald Trump must honour the temporary nationwide block on his ban on travellers from seven mainly Muslim nations, the Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson has said.

bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38866749

This was posted 40 mins ago. Not sure if this is the latest development.


#2

The administration will immediately appeal this ruling to a higher court, the US Court of Appeals. District Court judges rarely have the last word in disputes with Presidents.


#3

This entire situation could have been avoided if the President went through congress (like how the government was set up) rather than trying to govern by executive order. Too many of the recent previous administrations have been consolidating power into the executive branch which is not good for our country in the long run.


#4

What congress? They won’t even show up! :mad:


#5

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:


#6

So explain this to me then, when Obama during his administration and went around congress because ‘they were obstructionist’ it was bad, unconstitutional, and a dangerous precedent. But because it’s Trump now it’s okay to try and make law via executive order? Not to mention congress is controlled by Republicans so it shouldn’t be too hard for Trump to get his various goals passed.


#7

He is not making law via executive order. As president, he has the constitutional right to implement immigration policies.


#8

Does he have the power from the constitution? I do believe he does via statute. I think if it was not an enumerated power he at least has it by statute. I generally oppose the way executive orders are used, but in this case I think it is entirely legal.


#9

Carter and Obama did the exact same thing as Trump is doing. Not a sound. Not a protest. Crickets. It was perfectly acceptable for these other two presidents but now it is an issue for Trump. The hypocrisy is so thick one can cut it with a knife.


#10

Of course he must unless he wants to be held in contempt of court.


#11

Or to put it another way, it was perfectly unacceptable of Obama but not for Trump.

Obama averaged the fewest EOs since Grover Cleveland 120 yrs ago.

pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/01/23/obama-executive-orders/

All Trump has done basically is EOs except nominate a SCOTUS nominee as Obama of course also did a yr ago, and whine about crowds and that he lost the popular vote and hang up on an ally while having a nice chat with his bro Vlad. My concern is he actually thinks he can be Putin and strong arm while not understanding his limits. He truly has a lot to learn about his limits.


#12

Trump does not have to honour the ruling, he can appeal it and he can (and has said he will) ask for a stay on the ruling in the meantime. Which could mean the order is back in force very soon.


#13

Hmmm maybe Trump should comply with the court order the same way Obama and the EPA complied with numerous court orders.

  1. Ignore it.
  2. Do everything very slowly saying you need more time to implement the order…
  3. Issue a new executive order worded slightly differently and claim the court ruling is not related to the new executive order.

Obama (Hillary too) and his justice department did this constantly for 8 years, without media coverage.

However there is a difference between the two, and a big one…

This probably goes to the Supreme Court. The 9th Circuit has the highest percentage (68%) of sitting judges appointed by Democratic presidents. At any rate this will be heard in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, the decision could go either way. Could split due to WA/Boston ruling. The 9th Circuit Court’s rulings reviewed by the Supreme Court were affirmed only 20% of the time and reversed and or vacated 80% of the time; a rate substantially higher than the average reversal rate.


#14

This court order doesn’t require issuing new visas to new applicants, just honoring the ones that were issued under Obama.e


#15

I don’t get it.

If the Democrats can find a minor league judge someplace that can overrule Trump, then why in 8 years couldn’t the Republicans find a minor league judge someplace that could overrule Obama?


#16

Or even a major league judge, like Roberts?


#17

As I mentioned in the other similar thread laying out the legal groundwork. SCOTUS has already ruled in the case of Japanese interment camps during WWII, that the president has the legal right to suspend the U.S. Constitution through executive orders involving case of National Security. Executive orders override the irrevocable rights guarantee under the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights on habeas-corpus and 5th Amendment. Those decision have not been overturned and therefore stand. We have in essence no U.S. Constitution :eek: and there I question if we are even a republic or a democratic nation.


#18

A District Court judge is not a “minor league judge.” I’m sure this decision will be appealed as soon as possible. Not sure how successful that will be.

Or, given the fact that we’re talking about Trump, maybe he’ll appeal to Judge Judy.


#19

Supreme Court doesn’t have that jurisdiction.


#20

It doesn’t matter!! SCOTUS has already ruled executive orders are valid regardless of which court decided it. Constitutional law makes the opinions of the Supreme Court the supreme law of the land. Since SCOTUS said U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights can be suspended (How else can you justify the Japanese interment of Americans) by executive order, then this executive order banning immigrants has already been ruled on by the U.S. Supreme Court as being valid. So what good will it be for lower Federal courts to issue a rulings in clear violation of a previous stare decisis ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court?


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.