SCOTUS likely to uphold 3rd iteration of travel ban

#8
#8
OuterBanksVol said:
If it weren't for immigrants, Trump would have never found a wife. FWIW my mom was an immigrant so, yeah, I take offense to Trumps fear mongering against foreigners.
Click to expand...

The law has nothing to do with immigration into the USA. Its about close inspection of visa applications. Since Muslims are blowing things up its reasonable to look at their visa applications intently. Trump has the authority to order this. My wife is a legal immigrant, my great grandparents were legal immigrants. We are all for legal immigration.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#10
#10
IPleadInsanity said:
The law has nothing to do with immigration into the USA. Its about close inspection of visa applications. Since Muslims are blowing things up its reasonable to look at their visa applications intently. Trump has the authority to order this. My wife is a legal immigrant, my great grandparents were legal immigrants. We are all for legal immigration.
Click to expand...

By "close inspection" you mean you're not allowed to come to our country if you're from one of those 6 countries. I have yet to read any reasoned rationale from the administration that legitimizes such a ban except for perhaps North Korea and Venezuela. It's an over reaching blanket not a filter. It effectively states that if you are Libyan you are a terrorist and a threat to our Nation. That's just dumb.
 
Last edited:
#13
#13
OuterBanksVol said:
This. As long as immigrants are paying their taxes I'm good with them.
Click to expand...

We have laws. Immigration laws...on the books...already in place. Those laws provide the path and mechanism by which one becomes a citizen. Not just "if they sneak in and pay taxes then it's all good". It's not about not wanting people to come here. Never has been. The slippery slope is when we start down the road of picking and choosing the laws we will enforce/like/acknowledge vs the ones we don't/won't. Hmmm....imagine treating laws against, say, rape the way we have so nonchalantly treated our immigration laws.

Edit: I think the travel ban will be upheld ultimately due to the terror threat from many of these countries (that's the President's job) and will eventually go away.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#14
#14
OuterBanksVol said:
If it weren't for immigrants, Trump would have never found a wife. FWIW my mom was an immigrant so, yeah, I take offense to Trumps fear mongering against foreigners.
Click to expand...

My post was specifically directed at your wording. See if you can figure out why.

As to the ban, I've always thought it was stupid, ham-fisted, and ultimately pointless, but Trump is granted authority to order it.
 
#15
#15
Vol_Doc said:
My post was specifically directed at your wording. See if you can figure out why.

As to the ban, I've always thought it was stupid, ham-fisted, and ultimately pointless, but Trump is granted authority to order it.
Click to expand...

and despite it never actually going into effect it had the effect Trump was going after. There were a couple articles when it first came out that quoted people who weren't going to try because of the possible ban.

we need more government like this. Not actually doing anything while getting results. instead of doing something and not actually getting any results.
 
#16
#16
LouderVol said:
and despite it never actually going into effect it had the effect Trump was going after. There were a couple articles when it first came out that quoted people who weren't going to try because of the possible ban.

we need more government like this. Not actually doing anything while getting results. instead of doing something and not actually getting any results.
Click to expand...

The stated aim of the ban was to protect the country from foreign terrorists. You really think a possible ban suddenly got terrorists thinking twice about trying to get into the US?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#21
#21
OuterBanksVol said:
Why should ALL people from 6 countries be banned? That's not a screening process, it presumes they're all terrorists.
Click to expand...

"Knee jerk" reactions happen all the time in government and business - often because procedures in place for a reason were ignored. It makes perfect sense to halt something to straighten up procedures required by existing laws and policies when they've been ignored to the point that they are non-existent. It's one of the problems with selective enforcement.

I'd go further and stop all immigration until we figure out how to find all those who entered legally and then disappeared - another selective enforcement policy that will go horribly wrong given time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#22
#22
OuterBanksVol said:
Why should ALL people from 6 countries be banned? That's not a screening process, it presumes they're all terrorists.
Click to expand...


•Currently only five (5) countries; Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia and Yemen are on the list. Only 10% of Muslim countries.

•The "ban" is not a permanent refusal to allow properly documented persons from entering the US and was never intended to be.

Here is an example:

April 10 – Chad removed from travel ban

The Trump administration removed Chad from the travel ban because the African country had “improved its identity-management and information sharing practices” enough, press secretary Sarah Sanders said.

It had been included on the list because of an office supply glitch that prevented it from supplying homeland security officials with recent samples of its passports. It was also unable to adequately share public safety and terror-related information with U.S. officials who screen foreigners seeking to enter the country, officials said.[/B]

•There are about 50 Muslim countries. So the vast majority are not on the travel ban and never were.

So it's absolutely not a religion based ban. Only a ding dong idiot whose brain rattles around his skull like a BB in a boxcar would call this a "Muslim Ban". I don't have words to describe the dopey idea that the ban "presumes they're all terrorists" from the now five countries on the travel ban, but the mental faculties of one who would say that are seriously in question.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#24
#24
Orangedogsrule said:
•Currently only five (5) countries; Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia and Yemen are on the list. Only 10% of Muslim countries.

•The "ban" is not a permanent refusal to allow properly documented persons from entering the US and was never intended to be.

Here is an example:

April 10 – Chad removed from travel ban

The Trump administration removed Chad from the travel ban because the African country had “improved its identity-management and information sharing practices” enough, press secretary Sarah Sanders said.

It had been included on the list because of an office supply glitch that prevented it from supplying homeland security officials with recent samples of its passports. It was also unable to adequately share public safety and terror-related information with U.S. officials who screen foreigners seeking to enter the country, officials said.[/B]

•There are about 50 Muslim countries. So the vast majority are not on the travel ban and never were.

So it's absolutely not a religion based ban. Only a ding dong idiot whose brain rattles around his skull like a BB in a boxcar would call this a "Muslim Ban". I don't have words to describe the dopey idea that the ban "presumes they're all terrorists" from the now five countries on the travel ban, but the mental faculties of one who would say that are seriously in question.
Click to expand...

Intent? Wouldn't go there.

Quote: “Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.”

If SCOTUS considered intent and campaign promises - which they should not - it would uphold the halt on the order. As it is, it appears it won't and therefore will overturn the lower courts.
Click to expand...
 
#25
#25
OuterBanksVol said:
Orangedogsrule said:
•Currently only five (5) countries; Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia and Yemen are on the list. Only 10% of Muslim countries.

•The "ban" is not a permanent refusal to allow properly documented persons from entering the US and was never intended to be.

Here is an example:



Intent? Wouldn't go there.

Quote: “Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.”

If SCOTUS considered intent and campaign promises - which they should not - it would uphold the halt on the order. As it is, it appears it won't and therefore will overturn the lower courts.
Click to expand...

Whatever the Trumpster said or wanted was not what happened and is not what the original 7 country temporary travel ban described or what the current 5 country temporary travel ban effectuates.

All you are doing is bloviating.
Click to expand...
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top