Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > Community Center > The Lounge > Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion
Register Blogging Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-09-2017, 06:29 PM   #2361 (permalink)
Your FBI Rep
 
Frownland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Atop of the Throne
Posts: 29,491
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anteater View Post
I don't think his order violates the constitution either. After all, Obama managed to justify a ban of his own for "security" reasons half a decade ago. Regardless of how justified Obama made it seem back then, why weren't the courts up in arms about it?
1: That wasn't a travel ban
2: There was an actual event that inspired that inspired the crackdown. Trump's is essentially giving him (or Bannon) 90 days to craft policy that he should have had planned months ago.
3: Two wrongs don't make a right

PS for Chula: the 9th circuit court has more overruled verdicts than any of the other circuits, I wouldn't rejoice yet.
__________________
Frownland is offline  
Old 02-09-2017, 06:34 PM   #2362 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SoCal by way of Boston
Posts: 10,663
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anteater View Post
I don't think his order violates the constitution either. After all, Obama managed to justify a ban of his own for "security" reasons half a decade ago. Regardless of how justified Obama made it seem back then, why weren't the courts up in arms about it?
Because it wasn't a ban. Stop listening listening to those trying to defend Trump's ban by citing Obama.

Big differences between Trump's immigration ban, Obama's 2011 policy - Business Insider

If anything what Trump's trying to do is unnecessary based on the work Obama did in 2011 to strengthen the policies for screening and immigration. Name a single terrorist act that took place here in the US from any of the seven countries that Trumps trying to ban. He needs to start focusing on domestic terrorism.
Chula Vista is offline  
Old 02-09-2017, 06:37 PM   #2363 (permalink)
Your FBI Rep
 
Frownland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Atop of the Throne
Posts: 29,491
Default

I love how so many people just despise every word that comes out of Obama's mouth...unless it has any kind of parallels to things Trump has said because dumb liberals!
__________________
Frownland is offline  
Old 02-09-2017, 06:37 PM   #2364 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SoCal by way of Boston
Posts: 10,663
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland View Post

PS for Chula: the 9th circuit court has more overruled verdicts than any of the other circuits, I wouldn't rejoice yet.
Someone made a case that the Supreme Court will also deny his appeal because his tone so far towards the courts and judges - and how they need to assert their control now before he runs amuck.
Chula Vista is offline  
Old 02-09-2017, 06:41 PM   #2365 (permalink)
Your FBI Rep
 
Frownland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Atop of the Throne
Posts: 29,491
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chula Vista View Post
Someone made a case that the Supreme Court will also deny his appeal because his tone so far towards the courts and judges - and how they need to assert their control now before he runs amuck.
If that informs their reasoning I hope that all members of the SCOTUS are stripped of their titles. I heard a great quote from Gorsuch on the subject: "A judge who likes every outcome he reaches is very likely a bad judge." Their decisions should be made based on law, not the fact that Trump was a little mean to them. I'd be totally ****ed if being a meanie was unconstitutional.
__________________
Frownland is offline  
Old 02-09-2017, 07:02 PM   #2366 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SoCal by way of Boston
Posts: 10,663
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland View Post
If that informs their reasoning I hope that all members of the SCOTUS are stripped of their titles. I heard a great quote from Gorsuch on the subject: "A judge who likes every outcome he reaches is very likely a bad judge." Their decisions should be made based on law, not the fact that Trump was a little mean to them.
I didn't word it very well. A lawyer on TV just made the point much more clearer. What they might do is read the decision and agree with the areas that basically say that Trump is trying usurp the court's opinions based on The Constitution as well as already being do disrespectful to the US judicial system.

What was Trump implying when he referred to the Washington justice as a "so called judge"? Saying something like that so publically can have the same affect on his base like constantly saying "fake news" does.

A president is not suppose to seed doubt in the American people about the soundness of our judicial process just because he's throwing another hissy fit.
Chula Vista is offline  
Old 02-09-2017, 07:25 PM   #2367 (permalink)
Your FBI Rep
 
Frownland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Atop of the Throne
Posts: 29,491
Default

It's not ideal that he does that, correct. But it is legal and therefore should not have a bearing in their decision.
__________________
Frownland is offline  
Old 02-09-2017, 08:33 PM   #2368 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SoCal by way of Boston
Posts: 10,663
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frownland View Post
But it is legal and therefore should not have a bearing in their decision.
How many times over the course of something this complex will a Justice come to a fork in the road where he/she really could go either way and stay within the confines of the law? I've seen it a number of times the last 2 years where our lawyers were absolutely convinced we were gonna win a point only to see the judge go the other way. And visa versa.

So a Justice needs to make a decision and either way would be acceptable to a final decision. Under the current circumstances it might help them decide.

If you ask a judge why he ruled a certain way the answer will always be "because I did - read the ruling".
Chula Vista is offline  
Old 02-09-2017, 08:43 PM   #2369 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SoCal by way of Boston
Posts: 10,663
Default

Website dedicated to spelling out all of the reasons why Donald Trump is the most fit president ever.

https://whytrumpisgreat.com/

Chula Vista is offline  
Old 02-09-2017, 09:23 PM   #2370 (permalink)
Your FBI Rep
 
Frownland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Atop of the Throne
Posts: 29,491
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chula Vista View Post
How many times over the course of something this complex will a Justice come to a fork in the road where he/she really could go either way and stay within the confines of the law?
"Going either way" literally breaks the confines of the law if a grudge or lack thereof determines the outcome of a case..

Quote:
So a Justice needs to make a decision and either way would be acceptable to a final decision. Under the current circumstances it might help them decide.
If the judge needs "help" in the form of a personal grudge to come to a conclusion, then I believe that they are not fit to be a judge.

Quote:
If you ask a judge why he ruled a certain way the answer will always be "because I did - read the ruling".
Ya know, I really doubt that you tested this idea out.
__________________
Frownland is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads



2003-2019 Advameg, Inc.

SEO by vBSEO 3.5.2 ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.