Ninth Circuit Court to announce their decision Today

[Wingnut]

No one under 35 is going to get that reference.

It was a beautiful reference.   Wasn't it.

[Bigun]

Maybe so.  However, this decision does not resolve that question. 

The ruling handed down today addresses the following: "The Government now moves for an emergency stay of the district court’s temporary restraining order while its appeal of that order proceeds."

The decision handed down today denies the emergency stay.  It is not a ruling on the appeal itself.

And doing so says that they agree that the judge issuing the order is empowered to second guess the president on national security matters.  They can't  possibly be any more wrong.

[INVAR]

I find it fascinating that during the Reign of His Heinous, King Obama, neither Congress or the courts stopped or put up any kind of restraints to all of his E.O.s and unconstitutional decrees.

[Oceander]

The court has no standing to rule at all. the law is clear. The power rests in the executive. This is like a girl that tells her parents she's going to the prom with the local drug lord, her parents telling her no and her asking what time they expect her home.

She ain't going so it don't matter.

Absolutely and without qualification wrong.  The court has the power, and the obligation, to say whether the actions of the executive conform to the requirements of both statutory and constitutional law.

[DiogenesLamp]

I find it fascinating that during the Reign of His Heinous, King Obama, neither Congress or the courts stopped or put up any kind of restraints to all of his E.O.s and unconstitutional decrees.

Because they are part of the same army,  and Trump is an enemy.   Yes,  Obama instituted bans,  and the courts didn't say boo. 

[Norm Lenhart]

Absolutely and without qualification wrong.  The court has the power, and the obligation, to say whether the actions of the executive conform to the requirements of both statutory and constitutional law.

The court has zero authority to deal in matters vested exclusively in the Executive branch concerning national security.

Zero. If you can find one word of constitutional law stating that any court can obstruct a President/CIC from carrying out his constitutionally manded job to keep the country safe, please share. Because the laws that give the president carte blanche to restrict A N Y immigration have been posted repeatedly. No where at all in them is there a judicial review provision or judicial oversight.

[r9etb]

On what basis did it deny the administrations request?

Read the decision here: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2017/02/09/17-35105.pdf

They discussed the following:

"To rule on the Government’s motion, we must consider several factors, including whether the Government has shown that it is likely to succeed on the merits of its appeal, the degree of hardship caused by a stay or its denial, and the public interest in granting or denying a stay."

For example, the states made a 5th Amendment "due process" argument; the court ruled that  "the Government has not shown that the Executive Order provides what due process requires, such as notice and a hearing prior to restricting an individual’s ability to travel."

Note that their standard here is whether the Gov't made a sufficiently strong argument to merit the stay; they did not.

[libertybele]

I find it fascinating that during the Reign of His Heinous, King Obama, neither Congress or the courts stopped or put up any kind of restraints to all of his E.O.s and unconstitutional decrees.

Honestly, I find this frightening...another 9/11 just waiting to happen.

[beandog]

Honestly, I find this frightening...another 9/11 just waiting to happen.

If it does, we know who to blame.

[mystery-ak]

Note that their standard here is whether the Gov't made a sufficiently strong argument to merit the stay; they did not.

As I mentioned last night after listening to the arguments the DOJ lawyer was pathetic....but I am sure they were going to decided this way no matter who the DOJ sent up there.

[Norm Lenhart]

Honestly, I find this frightening...another 9/11 just waiting to happen.

Pain teaches the stupid. Some people are really stupid and might die from the education. I just hope no one innocent is standing near them.

[skeeter]

Read the decision here: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2017/02/09/17-35105.pdf

They discussed the following:

"To rule on the Government’s motion, we must consider several factors, including whether the Government has shown that it is likely to succeed on the merits of its appeal, the degree of hardship caused by a stay or its denial, and the public interest in granting or denying a stay."

For example, the states made a 5th Amendment "due process" argument; the court ruled that  "the Government has not shown that the Executive Order provides what due process requires, such as notice and a hearing prior to restricting an individual’s ability to travel."

Note that their standard here is whether the Gov't made a sufficiently strong argument to merit the stay; they did not.

I believe the administrations argument in favor of the stay was essentially the same argument they made in judge Robarts court in the first place.

[DiogenesLamp]

For example, the states made a 5th Amendment "due process" argument; the court ruled that  "the Government has not shown that the Executive Order provides what due process requires, such as notice and a hearing prior to restricting an individual’s ability to travel."

Due process for people in Syria?   The Courts have no jurisdiction in Syria.  The people involved are in Syria (and other places outside the court's jurisdiction.) 


Care to try again for a non nonsensical argument? 

Note that their standard here is whether the Gov't made a sufficiently strong argument to merit the stay; they did not.

And of course the Judges are too brain dead stupid to recognize there is a serious issue of "standing"  and that the plain wording of the law makes it clear that the President has this authority.   


No,  it isn't that there are three idiots on the bench,  it's that the government didn't present a good case. 


It is insane that the government was expected to present a case. 

[INVAR]

The court has zero authority to deal in matters vested exclusively in the Executive branch concerning national security.

Well... The Turtle and the GOP oligarchy made the breach of Separation of Powers with their wholesale surrender of delineated duties a precedent now didn't they?

Since one branch surrendered it's powers to the Executive, it's of course expected that the Left would then see that as precedent to limit, interfere with and otherwise render null and void, specific duties of the Executive.

[r9etb]

I believe the administrations argument in favor of the stay was essentially the same argument they made in judge Robarts court in the first place.

Obviously didn't work either time.

But to reiterate: this was just a denial of a stay; the appeal itself hasn't happened yet.  The decision does show where the gov't falls short, in the view of the 9th Circus, so presumably a better and stronger argument could be made at that time.

Note that, had Trump simply taken a couple of extra weeks to give people and agencies time to prepare, the "due process" argument would not have anything like the weight it has now.

[Norm Lenhart]

Well... The Turtle and the GOP oligarchy made the breach of Separation of Powers with their wholesale surrender of delineated duties a precedent now didn't they?

Since one branch surrendered it's powers to the Executive, it's of course expected that the Left would then see that as precedent to limit, interfere with and otherwise render null and void, specific duties of the Executive.

Yea but I prefer the fantasy where constitutional law still governs America. Good old Mitch. Thank god smart pragmarists won the day and kept sending him to DC along with the other surrender monkeys.

Thanks RINO voters! Wonder who ends up dead and on your consciences over it this month. You are 100% responsible.

[Wingnut]

One thing is for certain.   There is a WWF type cage match coming between the Potus and the judicial activists in this world.

Pay per Vue.   

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

One thing is for certain.   There is a WWF type cage match coming between the Potus and the judicial activists in this world.

Pay per Vue.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMKFIHRpe7I

[Norm Lenhart]

One thing is for certain.   There is a WWF type cage match coming between the Potus and the judicial activists in this world.

Pay per Vue.

We wait in breathless antici....PAtion ;)

[Norm Lenhart]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMKFIHRpe7I

Good. He's experienced!

[Wingnut]

We wait in breathless antici....PAtion ;)

Fool me once.   lol!   

[Frank Cannon]

Don't these decisions basically subordinate the State Dept to the plaintiff states? Doesn't seem legal.

The powers that the 9th Circus are ruling on here are clearly covered as Executive powers. This bullshit ruling from this court is garbage and should be disregarded. If this court doesn't like it let them muster their army to enforce their rulings.

[Norm Lenhart]

Fool me once.   lol!   

I'm just vain ;)

[Wingnut]

I'm just vain ;)

You had me several posts ago when I was still quite naive...

[Bigun]

The powers that the 9th Circus are ruling on here are clearly covered as Executive powers. This bullshit ruling from this court is garbage and should be disregarded. If this court doesn't like it let them muster their army to enforce their rulings.

I completely agree with you Frank but it's not going to happen because we have been conditioned to accept Judges as our Kings!