The Supreme Court is letting the Trump administration mostly enforce its 90-day ban on travelers from six mostly Muslim countries, overturning lower court orders that blocked it.
The action Monday is a victory for President Donald Trump in the biggest legal controversy of his young presidency.
The court did leave one category of foreigners protected, those "with a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or en y in the United States," the court said in an unsigned opinion.
The justices will hear arguments in the case in October.
Trump said last week that the ban would take effect 72 hours after being cleared by courts.
The ban would apply to citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.
The Trump administration said the ban was needed to allow an internal review of the screening procedures for visa applicants from those countries. That review should be complete before Oct. 2, the first day the justices could hear arguments in their new term.
"Let no heart be faint. Let every arm be steeled. The guidance of Divine God points the way. Follow in His name to the Holy Grail of righteous victory!"
https://twitter.com/RepJeffDuncan/st...98283%2FSigned this letter to Justice Ginsburg demanding her recusal from cases involving the Trump Admin due to her previous comments #SCOTUS
injunction reversed, Hawaii v. Trump remanded:
http://live.scotusblog.com/Event/Liv...__June_26_2018
Oh a 5-4 decision along party lines.
No way didn't see that coming
As i expected. Said from the get go that the new version is probably cons utional.
LOL Berniebots.
Every decisions that comes on down will just be a reminder of how whiny and pathetic those freeloaders are.
I wanted mah free college and rent![]()
SCOTUS also weaponized 1st Amendment, as predicted, to allow CA Christian Sharia anti-abortion CPCs to LIE to pregnant women.
Lies, and accompanying fraud (CPC staff walking in scrubs and with stethoscopes as if they were licensed, legit clinics, doctors) are protected speech, even when the health of the hearer of the lies is in question.
what are you talking about?
Are you in the wrong thread?
They didn't vote because Hillary won the nomination or voted for Trump in protest. Gotta eat the cake now.
Liberals so sad that they can’t practice sharia law with their fellow Muslims yet.
sup bro? you enjoy popping in out of nowhere and dropping re ed lines?
Sotomayor Blasts Trump’s Anti-Muslim Travel Ban As 'Masquerade of National Security Concerns’ in Fiery Dissent
She said her conservative colleagues turned a blind-eye to the bigoted policy.
Sotomayor said they turned a blind-eye to the policy, which she called “anti-Muslim.”
Writing,
“The United States of America is a Nation built upon the promise of religious liberty,”
she added the “policy first advertised openly and unequivocally as a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.”
“The policy now masquerades behind a facade of national security concerns,” she wrote.
“This repackaging does little to cleanse Presidential Proclamation No. 9645 of the appearance of discrimination that the president’s words have created,” she added.
=============
Arjun Sethi
✔@arjunsethi81
Today is a dark chapter in US history.
The Supreme Court just upheld the #MuslimBan.
The dissent got this right.
This was never about national security; only anti-Muslim hate.
9:30 AM - Jun 26, 2018
https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-po...ional-security
Hows that re ed bro? U remember what muslims did to your ancestors? Kind of similar to what Muslims want to do to Europeans I. UK and Paris. What part is re ed?
Holy , this re still posts here![]()
Adam Serwer
✔@AdamSerwer
The Supreme Court upholding the travel ban means that
Trump can continue to express his prejudices publicly,
implement those prejudices through public policy, and
then be bailed out by the high court
as long as his advisers manage to provide a superficially neutral pretext.
9:26 AM - Jun 26, 2018
Like I said what part is re ed? The left is the party of feelings. You claimed Muslims to Europe would work and it didn’t. But instead of taking responsibility you have pretend the problem doesn’t exist. This is why you lost and will continue to lose
allowing people to move here is not the same as endorsing every tenet of their religion including the implementation of sharia law
i think there have been mistakes in europe where they have allowed limited implementation of sharia for parties that consent to have their matters administered there. i think thats a dumb idea. would be opposed to it here.
If Muslims was to submit to Sharia, then as long as no civil laws are broken, why the not?
Jews, Catholics, Mormons, etc submit to their religions' rules.
Yeah I’m sure the left will oppose sharia law here aka religion of peace
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)