A Ludicrous Ruling That Trump Can’t End DACA

[aligncare]

That is correct. If not the tweets, then something else. And if not Trump, had Cruz or any Republican done the same thing, tweets or no tweets it would be the same.

Good point. Every republican in my lifetime got the same treatment from the liberal left.

Does anyone seriously think if Trump backed down, humbled himself before his critics that anything would be different?

[Oceander]

It's not arbitrary if getting rid of it restores law and order. Actually keeping it in place is dangerous to legal citizens.

This judge disagrees with you.  We’ll just have to see what the appeals courts say. 

[edpc]

Does anyone seriously think if Trump backed down, humbled himself before his critics that anything would be different?

Does anyone seriously think he knows what 'humble' means?

[Bigun]

This judge disagrees with you.  We’ll just have to see what the appeals courts say.

This judge needs to be unemployed in the worst way.

[WingNot]

This judge disagrees with you.  We’ll just have to see what the appeals courts say.

Do you seriously have any doubt of the final verdict in this exercise in judicial activism in the end.      Tell the truth now.     

[aligncare]

Does anyone seriously think he knows what 'humble' means?

Trump shot to the top of three different fields: real estate, entertainment, politics. What does he have to be humble about? He knows he’s good.

[Cyber Liberty]

I’m not saying the ruling is correct; however, the arbitrary and capricious standard under the Administrative Procedures Act - assuming it applies - applies generally to prevent adverse actions against persons, it doesn’t apply in the abstract.   Thus, if a policy is put into place in an arbitrary way, but doesn’t negatively affect discrete individuals in a concrete manner, then the standard probably wouldn’t apply.  However, once the policy is in place, it cannot be arbitrarily and capriciously removed if the removal would have adverse consequences to one or more discrete persons.  That is the case here.

The Judge is just applying an old saw from the Soviet Secret Police.  Paraphrased here:  Show me the EO and I'll show you the arbitrary.

[Cyber Liberty]

This judge disagrees with you.  We’ll just have to see what the appeals courts say.

How many times has the SCOTUS overturned this particular Judge?  Sounds like they don't agree with him either.

[edpc]

Trump shot to the top of three different fields: real estate, entertainment, politics. What does he have to be humble about?

Aside from the fact 2/3 of those things aren't true, nothing, I suppose.  Trump's best Apprentice season was nowhere near the first seasons of the other Burnett show, Survivor.  Donny wasn't the most successful developer in NYC, much less anywhere else.

[Free Vulcan]

Well the judge made their stupid little ruling, and it should apply only to their jurisdiction, to be otherwise ignored everywhere else.

[Oceander]

Trump shot to the top of three different fields: real estate, entertainment, politics. What does he have to be humble about? He knows he’s good.

He has daddy’s money to thank for that.

[Oceander]

How many times has the SCOTUS overturned this particular Judge?  Sounds like they don't agree with him either.

Like I said: let’s wait to see what the appeals courts say.

[Oceander]

Do you seriously have any doubt of the final verdict in this exercise in judicial activism in the end.      Tell the truth now.     

Yeah, ‘cause I doubt a lot of things. 

[Oceander]

Well the judge made their stupid little ruling, and it should apply only to their jurisdiction, to be otherwise ignored everywhere else.

In this case, that was nationwide.

[WingNot]

Yeah, ‘cause I doubt a lot of things.

Even doubting your own "Gut" when it comes to such things.   Come on man. 

[Cyber Liberty]

Yeah, ‘cause I doubt a lot of things.

So do I.  The courts have become a crapshoot on most issues, and the most surefire way for a lawyer to look foolish is to try to guess what they'll do.  That Napolitano guy on Fox News looks like a fool on a regular basis, and he's paid to predict these things.  That's the way it looks to this non-lawyer.

[edpc]

Half of the time, these kinds of judges make idiotic rulings. The other half, IMO, they are purposely delaying the inevitable through judicial action. This is an abuse of their power and should be dealt with accordingly.

[Oceander]

Even doubting your own "Gut" when it comes to such things.   Come on man. 

Trump effed up the president’s power over immigration issues with his asinine tweets about Muslims, which I didn’t think would happen since border entry is a core executive function, but he did, the courts took the opening, and those rulings are still there.  So yeah, I think there’s a non-negligible chance that Trump screwed the pooch on this one too with his jackassed tweeting.

[WingNot]

Trump effed up the president’s power over immigration issues with his asinine tweets about Muslims, which I didn’t think would happen since border entry is a core executive function, but he did, the courts took the opening, and those rulings are still there.  So yeah, I think there’s a non-negligible chance that Trump screwed the pooch on this one too with his jackassed tweeting.

Alrighty then.  I move to disqualify this juror. 

[Cyber Liberty]

Trump effed up the president’s power over immigration issues with his asinine tweets about Muslims, which I didn’t think would happen since border entry is a core executive function, but he did, the courts took the opening, and those rulings are still there.  So yeah, I think there’s a non-negligible chance that Trump screwed the pooch on this one too with his jackassed tweeting.

I am of the belief California Judges would be ruling against Trump on a consistent basis even if he had never heard of Twitter.  The tweets are nothing but a pretext, this Judge would have found anther reason to overturn a policy he disagrees with.

[Oceander]

Alrighty then.  I move to disqualify this juror. 

Hopefully I’m wrong.  I’ve seen a decent bit of commentary from the usual suspects that criticizes the ruling, so there’s a chance it gets overruled. 

[Bigun]

I am of the belief California Judges would be ruling against Trump on a consistent basis even if he had never heard of Twitter.  The tweets are nothing but a pretext, this Judge would have found anther reason to overturn a policy he disagrees with.

You can bet your sweet bippy on it!

[Oceander]

I am of the belief California Judges would be ruling against Trump on a consistent basis even if he had never heard of Twitter.  The tweets are nothing but a pretext, this Judge would have found anther reason to overturn a policy he disagrees with.

Maybe so. But the tweets are objective evidence of Trumps bias and put a strong foundation under what might have been just speculative hokum.

[WingNot]

Maybe so. But the tweets are objective evidence of Trumps bias and put a strong foundation under what might have been just speculative hokum.

Now that is just a bunch of jurisprudence gibberish right there.

[edpc]

Maybe so. But the tweets are objective evidence of Trumps bias and put a strong foundation under what might have been just speculative hokum.

This is a lot of Hokum.....






Kamov KA-50