Poll of the Day > Supreme Court appears ready to side with Trump on travel ban.

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.npr.org/2018/04/25/604477703/the-supreme-court-s-grand-finale-trump-s-travel-ban

During arguments at the Supreme Court Wednesday, the justices seemed, by a narrow margin, to be leaning toward upholding the the third iteration of the Trump travel ban.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, who is often the deciding vote in close cases, for example, made repeated comments suggesting that the court does not usually second guess a president's national-security decisions even in the context of an immigration law that bans discrimination based on nationality.

If the court does decide in favor of the government in June, when a decision is expected, it would be a big win for one of the pillars of the president's politics. It's an issue that animates the bases of both parties, appealing to the grievance politics of Trump's supporters and outraging the moral sensibilities of the left. Between the travel ban and the proposed wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, that idea of exclusion is fueling the resistance to Trump and firing up liberals for this year's midterms.

In court Wednesday, faced with the challengers' assertion that the travel ban is indefinite and perpetual, Kennedy replied caustically, asserting so you think in 180 days we're going to have a safe world?

Perhaps the most difficult question the government faced came from Justice Elena Kagan. She presented this hypothetical in a future time, imagine a president, who is elected and is a "vehement anti-semite." That president issues an order that dots the i's and crosses the t's in terms of process, but is a proclamation that says no person may be permitted from Israel.

Solicitor General Noel Francisco, who was making the case for the government, replied that if the administration as a whole agreed, then the court would be obligated to uphold the order. But, he pointed out, that hypothetical isn't the the case here.

Kagan slyly responded: let's just say this is an out-of-the-box president.

That prompted outright laughter in the court room.

Francisco held firm, saying that if the Cabinet agrees that there's a national security risk, the court would have to uphold the order.

And he went further, stating that the court would have to do so even if in his heart, the president harbored animus.

Kagan contended that it's not what's in the president's heart of hearts, but what a reasonable observer would interpret.

Kennedy was concerned about that point. He presented a different hypothetical: He asked Francisco, suppose a mayor is elected after a long campaign of hateful statements, then on Day 2 after he's sworn in, he takes action adverse to those he made hateful comments about. Is everything he said during the campaign irrelevant? Kennedy asked

Francisco asserted, in fact, yes.

But, he added, that the Trump travel ban is not a Muslim ban because it does not apply to most of the Muslim-majority countries in the world, and this latest iteration dropped Sudan, Chad and Iraq when they changed their screening and security to minimum standards.

Not posting the rest of the article. You can read it at the URL above if you want. I've no interest in spamming.

Quite a few countries have strict immigration policies. I agree with them. No big deal, imo.
---

the US is the only fucking country in the world that doesnt seem to be allowed to regulate immigration.
---

Troll_Police_ posted...

the US is the only fucking country in the world that doesnt seem to be allowed to regulate immigration.

After a lot of research, Im for it. Makes sense.

Im just not for racial profiling.

its starting to finally make sense to europe after they started getting about a quarter of a million refugees/illegals mixed together every year flooding their countries and turning areas into "no go zones".

more or less a hostile invasion at that point.
---

Good
---

Troll_Police_ posted...

the US is the only fucking country in the world that doesnt seem to be allowed to regulate immigration.

Anytime we try to, some liberal gets up and recites the poem on the Statue of Liberty like it's legally binding.
---

Thousands of illegal immigrants are bursting out of American vaginas every year. We don't know who they are, what they want, if they're rapists, or if they'll vote Republican. It's disgusting. It needs to be stopped.
---

Blightzkrieg posted...

Thousands of illegal immigrants are bursting out of American vaginas every year. We don't know who they are, what they want, if they're rapists, or if they'll vote Republican. It's disgusting. It needs to be stopped.

Welcome to the Liberal Delusion.
---

Good.

We also need the wall built more than anything else right now. Vote Republican in 2018 to ensure that the wall gets constructed. National security comes before anything else.

WastelandCowboy posted...

Troll_Police_ posted...

the US is the only fucking country in the world that doesnt seem to be allowed to regulate immigration.

After a lot of research, Im for it. Makes sense.

Im just not for racial profiling.

Even at face value, it's not racial profiling. It would be religious profiling... although, given that it doesn't actually ban Muslims, it's not that either.
---

TheWorstPoster posted...

We also need the wall built more than anything else right now.

Lmao
---

Regardless, this ban has been stripped down so much that I dont really care if it goes through or not.
---

mmmm.. burrito supreme.....
---

Troll_Police_ posted...

the US is the only fucking country in the world that doesnt seem to be allowed to regulate immigration.

We're also the only country that has military bases all over the god damn place.