First of all, as I understand it, the constitution only lends due process rights to immigrants or refugees already living here in our country, not immigrants or refugees living somewhere else waiting to come into country. This means I think, that placing a ban or limit on immigrants or refugees living in another country is not against any rights given to them under our constitution, because they don't have any constitutional rights.

Second, they are given due process rights if they are living here, but if by that due process they are found to be a criminal or an enemy to the state, they do not have the right to continue to live here. At the point that they become a legal citizen of our country, then they have to be dealt with here through our system of justice.

Third, I know the crazy things this maniac president has said. I do not like him, I did not vote for him, and I will never vote for him. I think he is unstable and is scary. However, what he is doing, not what he has threatened, in regards to limiting immigrants and refugees, is not anything different than what other presidents have done at different times. It is limited in time and it is limited to just a few countries where the nation states have failed, where we have very little on the ground intelligence and our vetting process is basically made illegitimate because of these conditions.

Fourth, part of the vetting process for a refugee that is claiming religious persecution, is a religion test. If I claim I am a Christian being religiously persecuted and I need to come to your country, but I have no idea who Jesus Christ is or the basic tenets of the religion, then there is a reason to be suspicious of my true intentions of coming to your country. The same way if I say I am Buddhist, Muslim, etc. It is not a test to keep out a certain religion, it is a way to be able to tell whether you are being truthful.

Fifth, what this president has attempted to do with his executive order, is not any different than other presidents both republicans and democrats have done at different times of their presidency. I know he has called for and threatened all kinds of crazy things....but what he is actually doing is not any different.

So the lower court placed a stay on his executive order after two states attorney generals filed a suit claiming the president did not have the authority to place this ban on immigrants and or refugees. Judge Roberts decided to place a stay on this ban until it could be looked at closer and a decision legally made. It was not thrown out. It was paused.

It clearly spells out in the constitution that the president does have this authority. Yes, because of the crazy things that this lunatic has said, it does scare me that the constitution gives him this authority...but I think it does. And in this particular case, with this executive order, I think it is reasonable.

So the federal government filed an appeal in the 9th circuit court. The appeal was about the stay, or the pause placed by Judge Roberts, not the executive order itself. Does the judicial branch of the federal government have the power to pause an executive order, when the constitution clearly gives the authority to the executive branch to issue such an executive order?

The appellate court debated about whether they thought there was a enough of a threat for the president to issue this order. They decided that not enough evidence had been presented to convince them that there was not enough of a threat and decided to support the stay placed on the executive order by Judge Roberts.

First of all, the government did not present this evidence because it was not what was being appealed. It is not that the evidence did not exist. The government's case was about the constitution and the authority to write the executive order. I also think there was some question about whether the two states attorneys had standing in this particular case.

Second, can anyone see the gross overreach of power by this court? These judges are appointed not elected. These judges do not have the access to nearly the intelligence information that would be critical in coming to such a conclusion. Discussing such things in a public court of law would be grossly inappropriate anyway. Frankly, this is scarier to me than Donald Trump and his insanity. Do we want judges to be able to make decisions about national security? That is like going to your plumber and asking him to make a loaf of bread. Clearly not the role of this court.

That is all...Fire away.

I see no fiasco. The courts have simply pointed out that the Trump order is illegal. That is their duty and it is to their credit that they have not allowed themselves to be swayed by the mindless rhetoric and bullying spewing forth from the White House.

You keep referring to "refugees and immigrants". While the Trump order aims to stop refugees and immigrants, it is far from limited to them. It applies to anyone with any connection, however tenuous to the seven countries named, including many thousands of people who already have residential rights in the USA.

I refer you to my recent post about a British hero of the Iranian War (fighting alongside US troops) who was at first refused entry to the USA simply because he had an Iranian stamp in his passport.

http://www.pcqanda.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=217509&mesg_id=217509&page=

I'll rephrase my first statement. It is indeed a fiasco, but it is entirely of Trump's making.

---

Paul D

I'd also call it a fiasco different than other executive orders because most executive orders are given to various departments pre-approval for them to look over and find flaws in. This way, the executive order's language can be tweaked for maximum effectiveness with minimum side effects. They also usually allow for a delay before they take effect to ensure proper communication.

In my job as a web developer, I do something similar. If I'm making a web application, I'll write it out and then show it to various people who would need to use it. I'll have a small group of them use it in beta form for awhile to shake out any bugs and improve the process flow. When an application is ready to go live, I'll schedule a day for the go-live and will communicate/demo the application to as many people who will need to use it as possible. This way, when it goes live, people will know all about it and won't be caught off-guard with no clue as to what they need to do.

Trump's executive order, on the other hand, wasn't given to anyone to look over (except for some Republican congressional staffers who were forced to sign an NDA). It was implemented immediately without any communication as to how it should be enforced.

Going back to my web application analogy, this would be like me radically changing the look, feel, and functionality of this website without any communication and then trying to claim that the chaos that ensued wasn't my fault at all.

First off this EO was a sham and an illusion of security which will neither protect or make you more secure in fact probably the opposite.It was poorly thought out and even worse was the implementation.This is posturing by an egomaniac. Why the limited scope of countries with countries that actually had terrorists sent to the States not on this list?Your vetting process for refugees was already stringent taking almost 2 years to pass through it before acceptance and any suggestions that Obama was letting people in willy nilly is preposterous.

You say you don't want judges deciding security issues all they had to present to the judge was some evidence what they were saying was true at all and it doesn't have to be in open court.They don't have any just Trump's feelings and playing to his base.The thing about not having rights until within your borders isn't very Christian and don't you want to be on the moral high ground here?Pointing at Europe as examples is a non starter to me as that is a very different situation with a very different problem as far as refugees are concerned because of the way they arrived right from the ocean with no screening at all.It all boils down to a silly order for appearances that split up families and stopped people that were already cleared that had jobs and lives in the States.

The judges are sane, Trump is nuts -- you said it. I think it's pretty safe to assume that the judges who've thus far ruled in this matter are more aware of both the security issues involved and the social and legal ramifications of this mishmash of an order than the fool-in-chief Trump or the sub-fools who hastily cobbled it together and presented it for his signature. The way this duck-tailed bungling whirlwind of disaster operates, I doubt he even bothered to read it.

The Supreme Court Justices are appointed not elected. Are you maintaining the they have no right to determine the legality of a presidential decision?

Trump could go into any federal court and present any classified information (in a closed session) to justify a presidential order.

No president can issue an illegal order without risking judicial challenge. No person from any of the 7 countries listed by Trump has been the home of single person that attacked anyone in this country. Yet nations that have been the home of the attackers of the World trade center, and the Pentagon, and murdered thousands of our citizens were not included in Trumps ban. Do you find y that a bit curious?

Quote:

QUOTE:
The Supreme Court Justices are appointed not elected. Are you maintaining the they have no right to determine the legality of a presidential decision?

Trump could go into any federal court and present any classified information (in a closed session) to justify a presidential order.

No president can issue an illegal order without risking judicial challenge. No person from any of the 7 countries listed by Trump has been the home of single person that attacked anyone in this country. Yet nations that have been the home of the attackers of the World trade center, and the Pentagon, and murdered thousands of our citizens were not included in Trumps ban. Do you find y that a bit curious?

Wasn't Obama the one who made the list of countries?

What has that got to do with the present situation? In any case it was a list of countries where you might have traveled that opened you to more scrutiny and was not based on nationality and didn't automatically ban you from entry.So while those particular countries were identified under Obama this implementation is entirely different and totally based on nationality and in Trump's words might as well have said Muslim when he said Christians would receive priority.

Just his statement said Trump listed the countries. There are legal ways to come here and I know some legal immigrants have stated they agree with what he did.

This had nothing to do with illegal immigration though we are talking people that were seeking or already had visas/green cards so totally different situation.You are confusing the issues.

Quote:

QUOTE:
This had nothing to do with illegal immigration though we are talking people that were seeking or already had visas/green cards so totally different situation.You are confusing the issues.

Did you even read the law?

Even in the short time the order was in operation there are many, many documented cases of people with previously (and in the eyes of the courts, still) valid and in many cases long-standing right of entry, with family legally resident in the USA, or with records of having worked with the USA in the Middle East (armed forces interpreters) being refused entry. Allied soldiers held for no other reason than an Iranian stamp (received while fighting alongside US troops in the ME) in their passport. This net was spread far, far wider than illegal immigrants, and anyway the machinery to stop illegal immigrants already exists.

---

Paul D

What law? This was a Presidential Executive Order. Laws are made in Congress, at least until Trump burns the building down and blames it on either Mexican criminals or Muslim terrorists. Then suspends the constitution and, for the safety of the Homeland, declares himself Fuhrer. Curious, just what flavor was that Kool-Aid?

Quote:

QUOTE:
What law? This was a Presidential Executive Order. Laws are made in Congress, at least until Trump burns the building down and blames it on either Mexican criminals or Muslim terrorists. Then suspends the constitution and, for the safety of the Homeland, declares himself Fuhrer. Curious, just what flavor was that Kool-Aid?

Well did you read the EO? The president has the authority per the constitution to do it, Several people have interpreted it to the point the it does not affect people with visas other than some extra screening.

Some people have nothing better to do than cry. Even they contradict themselves. Seems the left is more worried about others than protecting their own, in more ways than one.

And equally the courts have the authority to rule it illegal. Which they have done. Sadly, Trump is your President. However he is not (yet) your dictator, although I have little doubt that or similar is Bannon's ultimate aim.

---

Paul D

If you have so little faith in your present system of vetting what has you so convinced that this particular method will improve that?Till we figure it out just doesn't seem very well thought out to me.If they had thought it out and done something in a professional manner there wouldn't have been half the outcry over this ham handed enacting of an EO. There was no emergency ,there has been no proof of any people wishing to do you harm have been pouring into the States that an immediate suspension was warranted.His National Security Advisor had to resign without even getting a whole month into the job shows you how much thought goes into his policies.

He will be able to claim that he fulfilled his campaign promises - but those "so-called judges", un-American Democrats, and traitor Republicans, organized "illegal aliens", and most everyone else in their right minds blocked him.

Keep in mind that if he's ever impeached, we'll get Pence - who will know how to do evil things in a professional manner. Maybe we're better off with Trump.

Jim.

You have a Manchurian Candidate in the Oval Office. Putin has something that if revealed would prove fatal to Trump. And all the rot is coming from the top down, not the bottom up. Every proto-fascist, authoritarian skunk in Trump's inner circle -- Bannon, Flynn, Conway, Miller - were hand-picked by the Liar in Chief. I give it six months at the outside before the lot of them, including Trump, are herded out the door. Hope that in the meantime the damage they'll do will be fixable.

Didn't you also predict that he'd never get elected in the first place?

He may get impeached but it likely will take much longer than 6 months from now. I hope you're right but I expect he will be here for four miserable years.

Jim.

Quote:

Didn't you also predict that he'd never get elected in the first place?

And I was right. He lost by 2.8 million votes. He was appointed by virtue of a stupid anachronism. As Bette Davis once said, "What a mess!"