Trump just got checked and balanced: federal judge halts travel ban nationwide

[SueEllenRules!]

Homeland Security suspends travel ban
President Donald Trump's government moved swiftly Saturday to comply with a federal judge's order halting his immigration ban — even as Trump denounced the judge.

• The Department of Homeland Security announced it has suspended all actions to implement the immigration order and will resume standard inspections of travelers as it did prior to the signing of the travel ban.
• Also, a State Department official told CNN the department has reversed the cancellation of visas that were provisionally revoked following the President's executive order last week — so long as those visas were not stamped or marked as canceled.
• Following the judge's ruling — and before the government's announcements Saturday morning — the International Air Transportation Association, a worldwide airline industry trade group, cited US Customs and Border Protection in telling its members to follow procedures "as if the executive order never existed."
• Friday night, the White House announced the Justice Department would file an emergency motion to stop the halt, but it had yet to do so as of Saturday afternoon. But Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson told CNN's Anderson Cooper Friday night that he was prepared to take his case all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary.
• Trump's order bars citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries — Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen — from entering the US for 90 days, all refugees for 120 days and indefinitely halts refugees from Syria.
• Federal Judge James Robart, a George W. Bush appointee who presides in Seattle, halted the enforcement of Trump's order Friday night, effective nationwide.
• Robart, ruling in a lawsuit brought by the attorneys general of Washington state and Minnesota who sought to stop the order,said the states "have met their burden of demonstrating that they face immediate and irreparable injury as a result of the signing and implementation of the Executive Order. "
• He said the order adversely affects residents in areas of education, employment, education and freedom to travel.
• The decision was met with swift denunciation by the White House — which originally called it "outrageous" before removing that word in a statement issued minutes later — and Trump himself, who blasted the judge personally Saturday morning.
• "The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!" he tweeted.
• Trump also sent out a series of tweets lamenting the ruling.
• "When a country is no longer able to say who can, and who cannot, come in & out, especially for reasons of safety &.security - big trouble!" he tweeted.
• Robart's ruling may have stung even more for the Trump administration because it came on the heels of its first legal victory over the travel ban. Hours earlier Friday, a federal judge in Boston issued a more limited ruling that declined to renew a temporary restraining order in Massachusetts, which would have prohibited the detention or removal of foreign travelers legally authorized to come to the Boston area.
• But it was the sweeping ruling from Seattle that had the federal government scrambling.
• Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Trump's criticism of the judge will be cited in the Supreme Court nomination of Neil Gorsuch.
• "The President's attack on Judge James Robart, a Bush appointee who passed with 99 votes, shows a disdain for an independent judiciary that doesn't always bend to his wishes and a continued lack of respect for the Constitution, making it more important that the Supreme Court serve as an independent check on the administration," Schumer said in a statement.
• "With each action testing the Constitution, and each personal attack on a judge, President Trump raises the bar even higher for Judge Gorsuch's nomination to serve on the Supreme Court. His ability to be an independent check will be front and center throughout the confirmation process."
• And Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said in a statement, "We need a nominee for the Supreme Court willing to demonstrate he or she will not cower to an overreaching executive.
• "This makes it even more important that Judge Gorsuch, and every other judge this President may nominate, demonstrates the ability to be an independent check and balance on an administration that shamefully and harmfully seems to reject the very concept."

https://apple.news/A3Gfbmzp4SF2HsACtBFKYKw

 

[SueEllenRules!]

Appeals court: No travel ban for now
A federal appeals court early Sunday morning denied the US government's emergency request to resume President Donald Trump's travel ban.

• The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has asked for both sides to file legal briefs before the court makes its final decision after a federal judge halted the program on Friday.
• What this means is that the ruling by US District Court Judge James Robart suspending the ban will remain in place — for now.
• The US Justice Department filed an appeal just after midnight Sunday, asking to pause a sweeping decision from the judge that temporarily halted enforcement of several key provisions of President Trump's executive order.
• The strongly-worded filing by the Department of Justice argued that blocking the travel ban "harms the public" and "second-guesses the President's national security judgment."
• The government's emergency motion lodged a mutli-pronged attack on Robart's decision, emphasizing the President's broad authority in the immigration context.
• "(Robart's ruling) contravenes the considered judgment of Congress that the President should have the unreviewable authority to suspend the admission of any class of aliens," the Justice Department wrote in its filing.
• DOJ further argued that the parties who filed the lawsuit — the attorneys general of Washington state and Minnesota — lack the ability to sue in federal court because their alleged harms are too "speculative."
• When the President was asked at a gala in Florida whether he was confident his administration would prevail in the appeal, Trump replied, "We'll win. For the safety of the country, we'll win."

https://apple.news/Af-hPRSoAT72D3TLZqHagAg

 

[SueEllenRules!]

Federal appeals court maintains suspension of Trump’s immigration order
A federal appeals court has maintained the freeze on President Trump’s controversial immigration order, meaning previously barred refugees and citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries can continue entering the U.S.

• A panel with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upheld the ruling of U.S. District Judge James Robart, who had decided Friday that Trump’s temporary travel ban should be put on hold. The Department of Homeland Security soon suspended all enforcement of Trump’s controversial directive.
• The Justice Department, representing the Trump administration, could now ask the Supreme Court — which often defers to the president on matters of immigration and national security — to intervene. The Supreme Court, though, remains one justice short, and many see it as ideologically split 4-4. A tie would keep in place whatever the appeals court decides.

https://apple.news/AmFsdInTOTZ2EE0Ven-BPDg

 

[SueEllenRules!]

And now a message from Pocahontas to Trump...

 

[SueEllenRules!]

Threats against judges in immigration ban cases leads to increased security
Threats against more than one judge involved in legal challenges to President Donald Trump's executive order on immigration have prompted federal and local law enforcement agencies to temporarily increase security protection for some of them, according to law enforcement officials.

• CNN did not learn how specific the threats were, but law enforcement agencies treated them seriously and out of an abundance of caution, the US Marshals Service and local police increased patrols and protective officers to provide security for some of the judges, the officials said.
• A spokesperson from the US Marshals Service declined to comment directly on the threats but said that while "we do not discuss our specific security measures, we continuously review the security measures in place for all federal judges and take appropriate steps to provide additional protection when it is warranted."
• The threats come as Trump continues his verbal criticisms of judges — something that has drawn concern from former law enforcement officials and others who fear that public officials should not target a specific judge, and instead base their criticism more broadly on a court's ruling.
• Security experts say that while Trump's comments were clearly not meant to put the judges' safety at risk, in general, public officials should avoid comments against a specific judge so as not to spur an unhappy litigant.
• "Federal judges are constantly under some kind of threat around the country, and the US Marshals investigate hundreds of threats every year on the federal judiciary," said Arthur D. Roderick, who is a retired assistant director for investigations for the US Marshals.
• "Anybody that has looked at what the US Marshals do has got to realize that an attack on any judge is an attack on the rule of law of the United States," he said, noting that the President's sister is a federal judge and the President should be familiar with threats against judges.
• But Leonard Leo, an adviser to Trump on the Supreme Court, says it is a "huge stretch" to equate the criticisms that President Trump has made with a threat to judicial security.
• "President Trump is not threatening a judge, and he's not encouraging any form of lawlessness," Leo said. "What he is doing is criticizing a judge for what he believes to be a failure to follow the law properly."
• "Judges are given life tenure so they can go wherever the law takes them knowing that they can resist being unduly influenced by criticism or by praise," Leo said, adding that "all the way back to Thomas Jefferson, there has been criticisms by Presidents as well as (the) general public."
• On Thursday, White House press secretary Sean Spicer was asked whether Trump regrets his criticism.
• "He has no regrets," Spicer said.
• Trump's criticism were based first on Judge James L. Robart, who halted the executive order pending appeal. Trump referred to him as a "so-called" judge.
• Later he suggested that Robart's ruling could put the country in peril.
• "Just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril. If something happens blame him and court system. People pouring in. Bad!"
• In a speech Wednesday to the National Association of Sheriffs, Trump reiterated that his executive order is meant to protect "the security of the country."
• But he took the unusual tack of criticizing the judges currently hearing the appeal.
• "I don't ever want to call a court biased and we haven't had a decision yet. But courts seem to be so political, and it would be so great for our justice system if they would be able to read a statement and do what's right," Trump said.
• He said, "I will not comment on the statements made by certainly one judge, but I have to be honest that if these judges wanted to, in my opinion, help the court in terms of respect for the court, they'd do what they should be doing. It's so sad."
• A federal appeals court ruled Thursday Trump's travel ban will remain blocked. The unanimous ruling from a three-judge panel means that citizens of seven majority-Muslim countries will continue to be able to travel to the US, despite Trump's executive order last month.

https://apple.news/AiuS1polNQcun2RhrCLr0XA

 

[Gabriel Maxwell]

I'LL SEE YOU IN COURT!!!!!

 

[KayLloyd]

I'LL SEE YOU IN COURT!!!!!

Umm yeah, THE SUPREME COURT, who will uphold the ban and finally put an end to the judge shopping tantrums of the Demotoddlers.

 

[SueEllenRules!]

Umm yeah, THE SUPREME COURT, who will uphold the ban and finally put an end to the judge shopping tantrums of the Demotoddlers.

As usual, dead wrong. From the article posted above:

The Supreme Court, though, remains one justice short, and many see it as ideologically split 4-4. A tie would keep in place whatever the appeals court decides.

And now a message from Demotoddlers to Republifascists everywhere...

 

[KayLloyd]

As usual, dead wrong. From the article posted above:

The Supreme Court, though, remains one justice short, and many see it as ideologically split 4-4. A tie would keep in place whatever the appeals court decides.

And now a message from Demotoddlers to Republifascists everywhere...

"Many" can "see" it however they want. The justices are sworn to uphold the Constitution, and they will do so regardless of their individual "ideology" about immigration. And p.s., all of the dancing with Shaq in world still won't make Hillbilly president or change the Constitution.

 

[SueEllenRules!]

"Many" can "see" it however they want. The justices are sworn to uphold the Constitution, and they will do so regardless of their individual "ideology" about immigration.

So the 2 justices appointed by Obama and the 2 justices appointed by Bill Clinton are going to go along with a Muslim ban? Not to mention Justice Kennedy, who was the swing vote in the case that legalized same-sex marriage (in fact, he wrote the majority opinion). You think he's a slam-dunk vote for bigotry? If so, my real estate agent will be in touch about that ocean front property I have for sale in Arizona.

And p.s., all of the dancing with Shaq in world still won't make Hillbilly president

And all of the hillbillies in America still couldn't make Trump president without a little help from the Russian government.

or change the Constitution.

Like the part prohibiting Congress from making any law respecting an establishment of religion or impeding the free exercise of religion? Or maybe the part prohibiting discrimination and guaranteeing equal protection of the laws?

 

[SueEllenRules!]

Federal Judge Blocks Trump’s Latest Travel Ban Nationwide
A federal judge in Hawaii issued a nationwide order Wednesday evening blocking President Trump’s ban on travel from parts of the Muslim world, dealing a political blow to the White House and signaling that proponents of the ban face a long and risky legal battle ahead.

• The ruling was the second frustrating defeat for Mr. Trump’s travel ban, after a federal court in Seattle halted an earlier version of the executive order last month. Mr. Trump responded to that setback with fury, lashing out at the judiciary before ultimately abandoning the order.
• He issued a new and narrower travel ban on March 6, with the aim of pre-empting new lawsuits by abandoning some of the most contentious elements of the first version.
• But Mr. Trump evidently failed in that goal: Democratic states and nonprofit groups that work with immigrants and refugees raced into court to attack the updated order, alleging that it was a thinly veiled version of the ban on Muslim migration that he had pledged to enact last year, as a presidential candidate.
• Administration lawyers argued in multiple courts on Wednesday that the president was merely exercising his national security powers and that no element of the executive order, as written, could be construed as a religious test for travelers.
• But in the lawsuit brought by Hawaii’s attorney general, Doug Chin, Judge Derrick K. Watson appeared skeptical of the government’s claim that past comments by Mr. Trump and his allies had no bearing on the case.
• “Are you saying we close our eyes to the sequence of statements before this?” Judge Watson, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama, asked in a hearing Wednesday before he ruled against the administration.
• Mr. Trump’s original ban, released on Jan. 27, unleashed scenes of chaos at American airports and spurred mass protests. Issued abruptly on a Friday afternoon, it temporarily barred travel from seven majority-Muslim nations, making no explicit distinction between citizens of those countries who already had green cards or visas and those who did not.
• It also suggested that Christian refugees from those countries would be given preference in the future, opening it up to accusations that it unlawfully targeted Muslims for discrimination.
• After a federal court in Seattle issued a broad injunction against the policy, Mr. Trump removed major provisions and reissued the order. The new version exempted key groups, like green card and visa holders, and dropped the section that would have given Christians special treatment.
• Mr. Trump also removed Iraq from the list of countries covered by the ban after the Pentagon expressed worry that it would damage the United States’ relationship with the Iraqi government in the fight against the Islamic State.
• Yet those concessions did not placate critics of the ban, who argue that it still imposes a de facto religious test on travelers from big parts of the Middle East.

https://apple.news/A7jUmVo8QQayXR9s-5i5dQw

 

[SueEllenRules!]

 

[Frank Underwood]

Umm yeah, THE SUPREME COURT, who will uphold the ban and finally put an end to the judge shopping tantrums of the Demotoddlers.

"Many" can "see" it however they want. The justices are sworn to uphold the Constitution, and they will do so regardless of their individual "ideology" about immigration. And p.s., all of the dancing with Shaq in world still won't make Hillbilly president or change the Constitution.

I wasn't aware that the Constitution allowed for religious discrimination against travelers from Muslim countries. Does it make an exception for Muslim countries that the President does business with?

It said standard inspections will continue, so it's not like we're going to stop vetting people who come here. We're just not going to arbitrarily ban people because they happen to live in a predominantly Muslim country. If the Trump supporters who agree with the ban really care about security, you'd think they would be upset that Trump didn't ban people from Saudi Arabia. You know, the country where the 9/11 hijackers actually came from.

And I know you love your silly little nick names like "Demotoddlers," but the fact that it was a Bush appointee that halted the ban proves that this is a non-partisan issue.

And all of the hillbillies in America still couldn't make Trump president without a little help from the Russian government.

Trump's Administration clearly has ties to Russia, but unless Russia is responsible for the electoral college, I don't see how they helped make him president.

 

[SueEllenRules!]

Trump's Administration clearly has ties to Russia, but unless Russia is responsible for the electoral college, I don't see how they helped make him president.

The Russian government clearly didn't hack the DNC for no reason. Their intent was to help Trump win the election by doing as much damage to Hillary Clinton as possible. And in the end, she lost by 77,000 votes in 3 states. Can anyone prove that Russia interference cost her those particular votes? No more than they can prove it didn't. What is becoming clearer every day is the likelihood that the Trump campaign actually colluded with the Russians to steal the election.

 

[Gabriel Maxwell]

Trump's Administration clearly has ties to Russia, but unless Russia is responsible for the electoral college, I don't see how they helped make him president.

You voted for Jill Stein while expressing repeated disgust for Hillary Clinton as a result of RussiaLeaks'... excuse me, WikiLeaks' revelations and you don't see how Russia helped Trump become president?

 

[Frank Underwood]

The Russian government clearly didn't hack the DNC for no reason. Their intent was to help Trump win the election by doing as much damage to Hillary Clinton as possible. And in the end, she lost by 77,000 votes in 3 states. Can anyone prove that Russia interference cost her those particular votes? No more than they can prove it didn't. What is becoming clearer every day is the likelihood that the Trump campaign actually colluded with the Russians to steal the election.

In that context, I get your point. I thought there might have been new evidence that Russia had a more direct influence over the election.

That said, we're certainly finding out just how deep the Trump Administration's ties with Russia are.

You voted for Jill Stein while expressing repeated disgust for Hillary Clinton as a result of RussiaLeaks'... excuse me, WikiLeaks' revelations and you don't see how Russia helped Trump become president?

Actually, those revelations had little to do with my vote. The emails were mostly an indictment of the Democratic Party leadership, rather than Hillary herself.

But yes, I can see how the release of those emails influenced the way some people voted. I'm sure Hillary supporters would have been just as livid to find that the DNC had conspired against her in favor of Bernie.

 

[Angela Channing]

If this policy does go to the Supreme Court it's wrong to assume that the judges would vote along the lines of the political party that originally nominated them. They are there to uphold the constitution not uphold the policies of an Islamophobic President.

 

[SueEllenRules!]

Trump Blasts ‘Unprecedented Judicial Overreach’ by Courts Blocking Travel Ban
"This ruling makes us look weak"

• President Donald Trump blasted a federal judge’s temporary restraining order preventing the enforcement of key sections of his latest travel ban, calling it “an unprecedented judicial overreach.”
• Speaking at a campaign rally in Nashville Wednesday evening just hours after a Hawaii judge blocked his executive order restricting travel from six Muslim-majority countries and suspending the nation’s refugee program, Trump lashed out at the courts, suggesting the ruling was a political act.
• “You don’t think that this was done by a judge for political reasons, do you,” Trump asked, before drawing out a dramatic and sarcastic, “Noooo.”
• “This ruling makes us look weak,” Trump said of the latest judicial rebuke, as a crowd of supporters booed the judge’s order. Trump promised to appeal the “terrible” ruling, even up to the Supreme Court. The White House has maintained that federal immigration law grants presidents the ability to close off immigration from certain countries.
• A Department of Justice spokesperson echoed Trump’s stance.
• “The Department of Justice strongly disagrees with the federal district court’s ruling, which is flawed both in reasoning and in scope,” they said in a statement. “The President’s Executive Order falls squarely within his lawful authority in seeking to protect our Nation’s security, and the Department will continue to defend this Executive Order in the courts.”
• Wednesday evening’s order marks the latest setback for Trump’s effort to implement “extreme vetting” of immigrants from Muslim-majority countries—which spun out of his campaign pledge to suspend Muslim immigration to the U.S.
• Trump’s first executive order, signed in January, was greeted by chaos at the nation’s airports and outrage from Congress, business-leaders, and even members of his own party. That order was blocked first by a federal judge in Washington and then by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which took note of statements suggesting the ban was put in place to target people of the Muslim faith.
• Trump criticized the first federal judge to block his order as a “so-called judge,” an assault that prompted his nominee for the Supreme Court, Judge Neil Gorsuch, to bemoan attacks on the federal judiciary. Rather than appeal the Ninth Circuit’s ruling, as Trump himself wanted to do, the White House went back to the drawing board, working with lawyers, bureaucrats and allies on Capitol Hill to devise a scaled-back order that could withstand legal scrutiny. Thwarted again, on Wednesday, Trump seemed to embrace longstanding GOP calls to explore splitting the Ninth Circuit, one of the nation’s most liberal.
• “This is a watered-down version of the first one,” Trump maintained. “This is a watered-down version.”
• The Hawaii judge, Derrick Watson, criticized “illogic” in the government’s arguments and cited comments by Trump aide Stephen Miller that the second order would have the “same basic policy outcome” as the first.
• “Let me tell you something,” Trump told his supporters, “I think we ought to go back to the first one and go all the way, which is what I wanted to do in the first place.”
• Trump, who has argued that the travel ban is necessary to mitigate the threat of “radical Islamic terrorism,” argued that his order was necessary to keep the country safe—a suggestion that has drawn fierce criticism from opponents who argue data doesn’t support Trump’s claims.
• “The danger is clear, the law is clear, the need for my executive order is clear,” Trump said.

https://apple.news/An587FuK1RuS82Upv5g26qA

 

[Frank Underwood]

Trump originally said he wouldn't allow any Muslim to enter the country, then quickly made an exception for the Muslim countries he does business with. The majority of 9/11 hijackers came here from Saudi Arabia, and the fact that they're not one of the banned nations proves Trump is full of crap. His list of banned countries is designed to appease his xenophobic supporters, but not at the expense of his business interests.

I'm glad to see these "so-called judges" putting a stop to this so-called president's travel ban.

 

[Gabriel Maxwell]

The majority of 9/11 hijackers came here from Saudi Arabia, and the fact that they're not one of the banned nations proves Trump is full of crap.

In fact he just hosted a prominent Saudi guest for lunch at the White House on Tuesday:

"12:30 p.m.: President Donald Trump will have lunch with Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, the Deputy Crown Prince and Minister of Defense of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, in the Old Family Dining Room."

http://www.politico.com/blogs/donal...17/03/trump-schedule-today-white-house-236024

For those who wish to keep tabs on Trump's weekday schedule (weekends are irrelevant since he mostly spends them playing golf and filling Mar-a-Lago coffers with taxpayers' money), POLITICO usually has it up between 9-10am Eastern here:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/donald-trump-administration