https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...ident-trump-immigration-travel-ban/701110002/ The 5-4 ruling reverses a series of lower court decisions that had struck down the ban as Illegal or unconstitutional. It hands a major victory to Trump, who initiated the battle to ban travelers a week after assuming office last year. It was a defeat for Hawaii and other states that had challenged the action, as well as immigration rights groups. Chief Justice John Roberts issued the opinion, supported by the court's other four conservatives. He said entry restrictions were limited to countries previously designated by Congress or prior administrations as posing national security risks. And he noted that it followed a worldwide review process by several government agencies.
Thank God. Hopefully this can put an end to the current wave of brutal terrorist attacks by muslims in this country, the victims of the Bowling Green massacre shall never be forgotten.
Strange that the justices didn't take Trump's religious rantings into effect in this ruling, but they did take the cake maker's religious statements into consideration for that ruling.
actually, no. given Trump's religious rantings, many, including Republicans, and some in the WH, had expected Justice Kennedy, the swing vote, to side w the more progressive justices
Well, it's what I always expected. I think everyone knew that the 4 liberal justices would side against it and the 4 conservative justices would side with it, as you said, it came down to the moderate. Since Kennedy is a true moderate, there's always a chance that he does something unexpected but the revised ban was well within the scope of presidential power and there was a solid justification for the action and that's why I always expected this ruling.
Sad day for America. Not just this ruling, but a series of rulings that now clearly show that this will be a politically driven and partisan decided Supreme Court. Seems the five will ignore trump's statements and rule only on the "assumption" that the government will act in good faith. And also hypocritical, since the court placed great weight on what the local govt said in the baker wedding cake decision, but completely ignored trump's statements in this case. An interesting point made with reference to Korematsu (Japanese internment camps)...
As it happened I said inserting Venezuela and NK in the ban would be essential in hiding what it truly was. My gut is never wrong about these things. I have the BEST GUT! Can't fault the Supreme court but credit whoever wrote in Venezuela and Nk in there. Obama did well in the republican controlled Supreme court. Mueller is Republican so I'm not going to say the SC is on the take like nba refs.
As a former President said, elections have consequences. The swing vote on the court was a result of Trump winning the election. If people don't like the bizarre rulings coming out of the Supreme Court, then get politically involved. The current court is not 100% partisan, as Kennedy and Roberts will from time to time break from their party..... but it is pretty right leaning right now. Congratulations to Donald Trump and Bannon; and all the supporters of Donald Trump on getting a ruling that is what Trump campaigned on. We will see how this all works out.
It's not just a result of Trump. It's a result of the 2014 midterms. Lowest turnout in 70 years. If the Senate had stayed Democratic, we'd have Merrick Garland in his rightful place on the bench. If Hillary had won, we'd likely STILL have a vacant seat on the supreme court. This is the new reality of the Supreme Court.
Part of the reason the Senate didn't stay controlled by the Democrats was the extremely liberal justices they put on the SCOTUS....and if it stayed controlled by Democrats, Obama would have nominated someone even further to the left than Garland. So basically what I'm saying is that you don't want to run on SCOTUS nominations, it ends up making more people vote against Democrats.
I agree that the current court isn't far right. It certainly leans right and this rash of decisions will rightly have liberals worried about the future of the court but it's their fault for not voting. They were warned. Instead they wanted to protest vote or sit home because it didn't matter. If the Trump presidency doesn't wake them up then nothing will. Really, the future of the country. I think the SCOTUS is the last branch that hasn't been ruined by extreme partisanship as it is really bad for the country if the SCOTUS starts basically deciding every decision for conservatives (Or liberals) and becomes predictable. It sounds apocalyptic for sure but it would signal the end of this country for one party to hold all of the power regardless of which party it is.
That's not supported by the data. Republican turnout wasn't high (it was bad, actually). Dem turnout was downright awful. Terrible turnout is always a recipe for Republican victories. Has been for decades. 2014 was not a red tidal wave in response to SCOTUS nominees. It was a blue wet fart of apathy.
SCOTUS nominations was an issue Republicans used to take away Democrat control of the House, Senate, and eventually the White House....data suggests that it's a consistent winner for Republican candidates. Hell that issue got people to vote for Donald F'n Trump!
I think that we would have a SC Justice by now, had Clinton won the election. There is always a chain of dominoes that can be pointed to...... but in this case we are seeing the consequences of electing an extremist President.
It seems to me that whether it’s legal or not should be decided independent of who is in office. We could ask ourselves — would this ban be illegal if it was instituted with Obama in office? If the answer is no, then I think it should be no in the present case as well. Making inferences about intent based on past statements from Trump during the campaign is reasonable — I am fairly certain that his racist leanings are motivating this — but should that really factor into the legality question?
