THE ERA OF TRUMP

[Penner]

Court Of Appeals Unanimously Rules Against Reinstating Trump's Immigration Executive Order
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-0 ... tive-order

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has unanumously ruled for the U.S. to remain open to refugees and visa holders from seven Muslim-majority countries while the Trump administration fights to reinstate a travel ban in the name of national security.

The San Francisco-based appeals court on Thursday denied the government’s request to close the doors after days of public debate over President Donald Trump’s attacks on the judicial system and a rush of fearful immigrants. The ruling increases the likelihood that the administration will ask the Supreme Court to step into a case that’s the biggest test of Trump’s executive power yet.

The appeals court refused to reinstate Trump’s order after a Seattle judge halted enforcement while courts decide whether it’s constitutional.

Link to Opinion: https://d3bsvxk93brmko.cloudfront.net/d ... -35105.pdf

No surprises--the 9th Circuit is the most liberal circuit in the U.S.

I mean there was at least one judge, out of the three, who was appointed by W. back during his term as president.

[de officiis]

Abstracted portions of opinion: Due Process

- the Government argues that most or all of the individuals affected by the Order have no rights under the Due Process Clause.

- § 3(c) denies re-entry to certain lawful permanent residents and non-immigrant visaholders without constitutionally sufficient notice and an opportunity to respond

- § 3(c) prohibits certain lawful permanent residents and non-immigrant visaholders from exercising their separate and independent constitutionally protected liberty interests in travelling abroad and thereafter re-entering the U.S.

- § 5 contravenes the procedures provided by federal statute for refugees seeking asylum and related relief in the United States

- The procedural protections provided by the Due Process Clause are not limited to citizens. Rather, they “appl[y] to all ‘persons’ within the United States, including aliens,” regardless of “whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent

- Due process rights also apply to certain aliens attempting to reenter the U.S. after travelling abroad. The Government has provided no affirmative argument showing that the States’ procedural due process claims fail as to these categories of aliens. For example, the Government has failed to establish that lawful permanent residents have no due process rights when seeking to re-enter the U.S. Nor has the Government established that the Executive Order provides lawful permanent residents with constitutionally sufficient process to challenge their denial of re-entry.

- The Government has not shown that the Order provides what due process requires, such as notice and a hearing prior to restricting an individual’s ability to travel.

- The Government has argued that, even if lawful permanent residents have due process rights, the States’ challenge to § 3(c) based on its application to lawful permanent residents is moot because several days after the Order was issued, White House counsel issued “[a]uthoritative [g]uidance” stating that §§ 3(c) and 3(e) of the Order do not apply to lawful permanent residents. At this point, however, we cannot rely upon the Government’s contention that the Order no longer applies to lawful permanent residents. The Government has offered no authority establishing that White House counsel is empowered to issue an amended order superseding the Order signed by the President and now challenged by the States, and that proposition seems unlikely.

- Even if the claims based on the due process rights of lawful permanent residents were no longer part of this case, the States would continue to have potential claims regarding possible due process rights of other persons who are in the U.S., even if unlawfully, non-immigrant visaholders who have been in the U.S. but temporarily departed or wish to temporarily depart, and applicants who have a relationship with a U.S. resident or an institution that might have rights of its own to assert. Accordingly, the Government has not demonstrated that the States lack viable claims based on the due process rights of persons who will suffer injuries to protected interests due to the Order. Indeed, the existence of such persons is obvious.

[TheReal_ND]

306-232

[SuburbanFarmer]

306-232

LOOKS LIKE SHE'S SOAKING UP THE RIGHT WING TEARS ALREADY. SAD!

[TheReal_ND]

The following is the COMPLETELY FUCKING RETARDED LOGIC OF THE 9th CIRCUS' DECISION:

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/o ... -35105.pdf

We therefore conclude that the States have alleged harms to their proprietary interests traceable to the Executive Order. The necessary connection can be drawn in at most two logical steps: (1) the Executive Order prevents nationals of seven countries from entering Washington and
Minnesota; (2) as a result, some of these people will not enter state universities, some will not join those universities as faculty, some will be prevented from performing research,
and some will not be permitted to return if they leave. And we have no difficulty concluding that the States’ injuries would be redressed if they could obtain the relief they ask
for: a declaration that the Executive Order violates the Constitution and an injunction barring its enforcement. The
Government does not argue otherwise.

BECAUSE A FEW RAPEFUGESS CAN'T GO TO SCHOOL IN MINNESOTA AND WASHINGTON! CROOKED!

[SuburbanFarmer]

The following is the COMPLETELY FUCKING RETARDED LOGIC OF THE 9th CIRCUS' DECISION:

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/o ... -35105.pdf

We therefore conclude that the States have alleged harms to their proprietary interests traceable to the Executive Order. The necessary connection can be drawn in at most two logical steps: (1) the Executive Order prevents nationals of seven countries from entering Washington and
Minnesota; (2) as a result, some of these people will not enter state universities, some will not join those universities as faculty, some will be prevented from performing research,
and some will not be permitted to return if they leave. And we have no difficulty concluding that the States’ injuries would be redressed if they could obtain the relief they ask
for: a declaration that the Executive Order violates the Constitution and an injunction barring its enforcement. The
Government does not argue otherwise.

BECAUSE A FEW RAPEFUGESS CAN'T GO TO SCHOOL IN MINNESOTA AND WASHINGTON! CROOKED!

KEEPING STUDENT RAPE GANGS IN AMERICA. NOT WINNING!

[TheReal_ND]

SEE YOU IN COURT FAGGOT! WHAT A MESS!

[KerningChameleon]

STATES' RIGHTS!

I'M ACTUALLY QUITE CALM RIGHT NOW, I HOPE YOU'RE HAVING A NICE DAY AS WELL!

[Okeefenokee]

Did y'all not see what I said?

Magga is the fourth noble truth of Buddhism. The path to being free of the suffering of life.

MAGGA

[SuburbanFarmer]

Did y'all not see what I said?

Magga is the fourth noble truth of Buddhism. The path to being free of the suffering of life.

MAGGA

EMBRACE YOUR INNER CALM. BREATHE DEEPLY AND RELAX. FEEL AT ONE WITH NATURE AND THE ENERGY AROUND YOU.