About damn time we have some common sense taking charge
Trump travel ban partly reinstated; fall court arguments set
The Supreme Court is allowing the Trump administration to go forward with a limited version of its ban on travel from six mostly Muslim countries, a victory for President Donald Trump in the biggest legal controversy of his young presidency.
The justices will hear full arguments in October in the case that has stirred heated emotions across the nation. In the meantime, the court said Monday that Trump's ban on visitors from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen can be enforced if those visitors lack a "credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States."
http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/3d281c11...0b4727b77c
(06-26-2017, 02:33 PM)The Drifter Wrote: [ -> ]About damn time we have some common sense taking charge
Trump travel ban partly reinstated; fall court arguments set
The Supreme Court is allowing the Trump administration to go forward with a limited version of its ban on travel from six mostly Muslim countries, a victory for President Donald Trump in the biggest legal controversy of his young presidency.
The justices will hear full arguments in October in the case that has stirred heated emotions across the nation. In the meantime, the court said Monday that Trump's ban on visitors from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen can be enforced if those visitors lack a "credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States."
http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/3d281c11...0b4727b77c
Common sense prevails. We'll see if law eventually does as well.
IMO, such courts should be reviewed whenever their lack of judgement is overturned by the Supreme Court. If that's happening, they aren't doing an acceptable job. Sure, the function of the Supreme Court is intended to rectify mistakes or confirm good judgments. However, if it becomes a pattern and proven chronic that your judgments aren't passing muster, that is proving they no longer can uphold their duty and should be removed of the responsibilities they are not fulfilling.
Imo, Congress ought to pass a law making executive actions/orders under the original jurisdiction of the SCOTUS. All of these puffed up lower level federal judges should have no opportunity to substitute their policy judgments for those of the POTUS (regardless of who he/she is at any given time).
What makes this decision by the SCOTUS so important is that it basically overturned the decision(s) made by the lower courts. In a simple nutshell, it says that the lower courts made a decision based on "opinion" rather than constitutionality.
In other words, the lower courts (the 9th Circuit) as well as others didn't rule based on The Constitution, they ruled on "opinion".
The whole ruling on "opinion" needs to be eradicated.
(06-27-2017, 06:09 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]What makes this decision by the SCOTUS so important is that it basically overturned the decision(s) made by the lower courts. In a simple nutshell, it says that the lower courts made a decision based on "opinion" rather than constitutionality.
In other words, the lower courts (the 9th Circuit) as well as others didn't rule based on The Constitution, they ruled on "opinion".
The whole ruling on "opinion" needs to be eradicated.
Yup. The fact that the lower courts ruled based on comments candidate Trump made during the campaign, and not based on the order itself exposed that. One of the judges actually stated that the order itself was perfectly legal, but ruled against it because of campaign comments. Can't do that.
The 9th Curcuit should be dismissed and replaced. They are the most overturned court in the land.