Supreme Court Upholds Trump Travel Ban

[Smok3r]

But the picture you posted. Prove that those are a group of Somalis. They aren't and you posted fake news.

You're absolutely right, I posted the wrong photo.

Here are some Somalis attempting to blend in with Mexico's culture by wearing tri-colored (green, white, red) soccer uniforms...

 

[Pessimystic]

Yep, there are roughly 50 countries with a Muslim majority and yet the ban only has what, 7 or 8? The autistic screeching about Hitler and Nazis from the left is fun though.

It's getting rather annoying, though, the constant screeching, that is.

 

[Rational Poster]

Such as?

These new eligibility requirements do not bar travel to the United States. Instead, a traveler who does not meet the requirements must obtain a visa for travel to the United States, which generally includes an in-person interview at a U.S. Embassy or Consulate.

Can you read the bolded part of the text you copy pasted to me and didn't read nice and slowly?

 

[My Spot]

It's getting rather annoying, though, the constant screeching, that is.

Meh, the more the left talks about Hitler and Nazis and concentrations camps the less chance there is of a supposed blue wave this fall.

 

[Pessimystic]

What's your point? You already posted this.

It's different from Trump's new ban. The justification is different. The countries are different. Who is impacted in those countries is also different. Trump's rhetoric is different.

Things can be similar but still different. I hope this helps.

LOL, two added countries changes everything. One is not even a muslim country.

 

[Rational Poster]

LOL, two added countries changes everything. One is not even a muslim country.

No it's much different than that. You should try reading sometime.

 

[Seano]

Why not protect us from Saudi grown terrorists now? Or do we have to wait for another 9/11?

Thats a separate topic.

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

Thats a separate topic.

You said the travel ban is to protect America. Countries that have have produced actual terrorists that have killed citizens are not on the list. So it's not about protecting Americans at all, is it?

 

[Mark Hunts FIST]

The biggest thing that's happened in politics in the last 3 years in my opinion, is not confirming Obamas Supreme Court pick. Thankfully.

I wonder if dems thought, well Hillary will win anyway and then pick the Supreme Court justice we like.

 

[Pessimystic]

These new eligibility requirements do not bar travel to the United States. Instead, a traveler who does not meet the requirements must obtain a visa for travel to the United States, which generally includes an in-person interview at a U.S. Embassy or Consulate.

Can you read the bolded part of the text you copy pasted to me and didn't read nice and slowly?

From the White House website:

(b) Exceptions. The suspension of entry pursuant to section 2 of this proclamation shall not apply to:

(i) any lawful permanent resident of the United States;

(ii) any foreign national who is admitted to or paroled into the United States on or after the applicable effective date under section 7 of this proclamation;

(iii) any foreign national who has a document other than a visa — such as a transportation letter, an appropriate boarding foil, or an advance parole document — valid on the applicable effective date under section 7 of this proclamation or issued on any date thereafter, that permits him or her to travel to the United States and seek entry or admission;

(iv) any dual national of a country designated under section 2 of this proclamation when the individual is traveling on a passport issued by a non-designated country;

(v) any foreign national traveling on a diplomatic or diplomatic-type visa, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visa, C-2 visa for travel to the United Nations, or G-1, G-2, G-3, or G-4 visa; or

(vi) any foreign national who has been granted asylum by the United States; any refugee who has already been admitted to the United States; or any individual who has been granted withholding of removal, advance parole, or protection under the Convention Against Torture.

Note the bolded.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presiden...ited-states-terrorists-public-safety-threats/

 

[Seano]

You said the travel ban is to protect America. Countries that have have produced actual terrorists that have killed citizens are not on the list. So it's not about protecting Americans at all, is it?

Again, we don't get refugees from Saudu Arabia. Are you just pretending not to get this or ignoring it, hoping no one notices? This is a temporary ban on travel from the countries we receive the most refugees from.

 

[Rational Poster]

From the White House website:


Note the bolded.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presiden...ited-states-terrorists-public-safety-threats/

You didn't bold anything and that doesn't help your position even after reading all of it.

 

[Pessimystic]

You didn't bold anything and that doesn't help your position even after reading all of it.

Yes I did, and yes it does. The order allows exceptions for certain visas.
Either way, the ban is upheld and that's that.

EDIT:

Here you go, a less wordy analysis.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...ravel-ban-order-differences-trump-immigration

• Lawful permanent US residents – ie green-card holders.
• People inside the United States. The ban only applies to people who are abroad at the time of the order.
  
• Valid visa holders. The ban does not apply to people who currently have a valid visa for travel to the United States or who had a valid visa before the date of the original ban (27 January 2017).
• People with other valid documents. These include holders of diplomatic visas and of documents that are not visas but that permit travel to the United States, such as “advance parole” documents, which can allow entry to the US for humanitarian reasons.
• Certain non-US citizens who are dual nationals. A dual national from a “country of particular concern” (to be defined in a worldwide review within 20 days) may be exempted from the ban if the person is traveling on a passport issued by a non-designated country.
• Asylum-holders, previously admitted refugees and individuals who have been granted protection under the Convention Against Torture.
• Hardship cases. Officials may grant waivers on a case-by-case basis “if the foreign national has demonstrated to the officer’s satisfaction that denying entry during the suspension period would cause undue hardship, and that his or her entry would not pose a threat to national security and would be in the national interest”.

 

[Supereem]

Full decision here:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/17-965_h315.pdf

5-4.

The dissent of Sotomayor/Ginsburg in this case is an embarrassment to our nation. They cite Trump's stump speeches at length and attempt to prove that he had unconstitutional motivations for the executive order. These people are operating far outside of a rules-based framework. Their job is is to evaluate whether the policy itself violated the Constitution or other federal law, not whether Trump's motivations were worthy of criticism.

The bias/overall craziness in the US system is a disgrace to the common law.

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

This is a temporary ban on travel from the countries we receive the most refugees from.

Those North Korean refugees are just banging down the door, amirite? And you are wrong regarding "countries we receive the most refugees from". We do not even get 2% of total refugees from Yemen or Libya. If what you just said is true, why isn't Iraq, Congo, Afghanistan, Burma or Eritrea on the list?

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

You're absolutely right, I posted the wrong photo.

Here are some Somalis attempting to blend in with Mexico's culture by wearing tri-colored (green, white, red) soccer uniforms...

Another day, another Trump bot busted posting fake stuff.

 

[helltoupee]

How far does that go though? Would you have allowed communists to immigrate to the U.S. during the 60s?

So are you suggesting that the Constitution should be suspended or tempered? I'm a bit surprised since I know that you post quite a bit of 2ndA stuff.

 

[Mark Hunts FIST]

But the whole point of the ban was for the extreme vetting program.

It's been two years where is the new program? Its been nearly 4x longer than they said they would need.

You mean something like this?

A)Implementing Uniform Screening Standards for All Immigration Programs. (a) The Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall implement a program, as part of the adjudication process for immigration benefits, to identify individuals seeking to enter the United States on a fraudulent basis with the intent to cause harm, or who are at risk of causing harm subsequent to their admission. This program will include the development of a uniform screening standard and procedure, such as in-person interviews; a database of identity documents proffered by applicants to ensure that duplicate documents are not used by multiple applicants; amended application forms that include questions aimed at identifying fraudulent answers and malicious intent; a mechanism to ensure that the applicant is who the applicant claims to be; a process to evaluate the applicant’s likelihood of becoming a positively contributing member of society and the applicant’s ability to make contributions to the national interest; and a mechanism to assess whether or not the applicant has the intent to commit criminal or terrorist acts after entering the United States.

Next you would need reports how it was working.

(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security, in conjunction with the Secretary of State, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, shall submit to the President an initial report on the progress of this directive within 60 days of the date of this order, a second report within 100 days of the date of this order, and a third report within 200 days of the date of this order.


So if you prevent the executive order from going through you cannot do the proper research and reports needed to implement the vetting program.

What you want them to do is make the vetting program before getting information they need to make it.

 

[JamesRussler]

So the ruling is a ruling based on its constitutionality, but the legislation is still terrible and doesn't protect the U.S. This may have backlash on muslims already in the country. Homebred terrorists exist in large amounts.

The first thing I thought of when I heard of the ruling was this:



Blind man ask me forgiveness
I won't deny myself
Disrespect you have given
Your suffering's my wealth
I feed off pain, force fed to love it
And now I swallow whole
I'll never live in the past
Let freedom ring with a shotgun blast
Burn my fist to the concrete
My fear is my strength
Power, rage unbound strength
Been pounded by the streets
Cyanide blood burns down the skyline
Hatred is purity
The bullet connects at last
Let freedom ring with a shotgun blast
Scarred
Pour the salt in the wound

Wow, after reading your post, I'm so persuaded that blocking travel from terrorist-supporting countries is a bad idea.

 

[Rational Poster]

Yes I did, and yes it does. The order allows exceptions for certain visas.
Either way, the ban is upheld and that's that.

EDIT:

Here you go, a less wordy analysis.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...ravel-ban-order-differences-trump-immigration

That's not what we're talking about though.