Law is on Trump's side

cnn.com/2017/02/07/opinions/ninth-circuit-should-rescind-mcenany-opinion/index.html

Probably one of the only decent CNN articles.

Tl;Dr the law is on Trump's side, and the silly efforts of a federal judge to put a stop to Trump's executive order on travel ban, ultimately has no power or lasting effect.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=YmDX2Htp_C8
youtube.com/watch?v=kAHzGp2YaFY
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Дa пoшёл ты в жoпy гoвнo

Wat

I am actually pleasantly surprised that this is penned so well. Seriously, I tip my MAGA hat to this article.

Speak human, pitor

Does it mean the immigration ban will go back up? When? Every passing day we give the shitskins more and more opportunity to come into our beautiful country

Amen. More articles and journalists need to actually do team research and present FACTS as opposed to blatantly writing opinion pieces that push specific agendas.

Likely, and as soon as the 9th district court finishes reviewing the current temp hold.

>a cnn article backed with facts
What day is it?

>Sup Forums will happily post articles from sites deemed "fake news" when they agree.

Hey, I give credit when and where it's due.

I do my due diligence in reading beyond mere headlines. I'm done with falling for sensationalist headlines.

Because for once, its objective fact.

Away with your vodka hieroglyphics, Ivan

The most ironic thing is that CNN placed this article under the "opinion" subsection.

Really makes you think.

It's gonna go to the SCOTUS, which is actually the best outcome even for Trump, once they rule it's lawful(and they will), they can never fight Trump on similar bans ever again just to stall it.

Sauce on pic?

Surprisingly well written.

SOURCE FOR PIC

>Probably one of the only decent CNN articles.
CNN always been decent.

Sofia Sivan

Aletta Ocean.

She doesn't look that nice upon closer inspection.
Still THICC though.

libweenies btfo, how could they even compete?

Personally I find too many articles written subjectively on CNN even when not penned as opinion pieces, which really puts me off.

This one in particular is very clean and concise and tells reality like it is, without added bullshit.

This.

>bam seven countries that happen to be Muslim majority
>liberals flip their shit
>muh Muslim ban
>case goes to supreme court
>rule in favor of trump that he can ban any class of non citizen, even green card holders as they have no RIGHT to travel to the US and green cards can be rescinded at any time
>trump goes on to actually ban all Muslim countries with the new ruling

54D trans chess

>CNN

Not even once

This semen demon. Who is she?

But but Trump will never accomplish anything, right?

it's "not" opposite day

Sauce my nigga?

In 2018 we will have headlines like:
>Trump's wall is pathetic, it can barely be seen from the moon

youtube.com/watch?v=YmDX2Htp_C8

Let's face it, we've all realized the suspension of the travel ban was just another unfounded knee-jerk reaction on behalf of liberals. This is a good article, but ultimately inconsequential.

low res pic is low res

2018 headlines would be more like

>History repeats: President Pence grants pardon to Ex-President Trump like Ford did with Nixon.

Checks and balances, bro. If one or two branches of government over reach themselves, it is the job of the third to check that power. The court opposition is the last vestige of democracy in the fashion of the founding fathers. Why do you hate the founding fathers?

Except it's the court over reaching since the president expressly has this power.

That's your opinion.

>h-he'll be i-impeached in two years!

Look at this tool. Look at her and laugh!

The court is the one actually making a power reach here. The president definitely has the right to issue a temporary, 90 day travel ban from certain places. The only way this law would be deemed unconstitutional by an unbiased judge is if it was permanent (overstepping the limited power of executive orders) or specifically banned Muslims (even then, it is murky if the constitution applies to non-citizens outside US boundaries).

When the law is so much in favor of Trump that even CNN is forced to report it's so.

Sadly the judge making the illegal anti constitutional ruling will not be impeached.

>trump goes on to actually ban all Muslim countries with the new ruling
If this is what actually happens, the amount of asspain will be legendary. I hope that this comes true.

But does he have this ace up his sleeve?

tfw Trump bans Sweden

pidar gandon

So you're saying it's time for the Congress and the POTUS to check the unti constitutional actions of the Judaical branch?
I agree they have been getting away with believing they are some kind of tyrannical overlords for too long.
They need to re-learn the fact that they have to actually follow the constitution and not do whatever the fuck they please.

I think a good start would be impeaching that Judge making the illegal order to stop Trump's EO.

There's a pdf of the Boston Federal Judge's ruling that had him cite many past cases and past precedents which made him rule against the ACLU in the end.

Meanwhile, the Seattle Judge's ruling in pdf form was just barebones.

I thought there were already laws to prevent judge shopping across the nation or did ACLU get lucky by finding a judge in Washington?

The Seattle Judge should have recused himself anyway since he does pro bono work for refugees.

Any decent judge would have recused himself if there was a conflict of interest.

There's the pdf of the Boston Federal Judge's ruling that had rejected the ACLU.

If you check out the pdf, you can clearly see a lot of past cases and precedents he cited in his argument that Trump's ban is lawful.

The Founding Fathers did not take into account the increase in human lifespan in America and activist judges much less judge shopping considering travel was by horseback on shitty roads.

Do you think there is any chance the Judge who made the ruling would be punished?

He was literally making a ruling against the constitution and against a large amount of past rulings of higher courts.
It's outright abuse of power.

With another president I would have thought that no chance he would be punished, but with Trump, perhaps there is a chance...?

>cnn
>fake news
opinion discarded

What actual parameters is the EO based on, was it specific about implementation, why does it also affect people who have gone through literally seven years of background checks and current legal residents?

Seems like the legal basis is simple. The EO is unconstitutional because it's not very well written.

A cnn article that isn't fake news?

How long til they're fired?

I don't speak pierogi, Yevgeniy

You guys sound like shills. Has CTR been replaced on Sup Forums by a Trump equivalent?

CNN has a few articles that aren't just spastic sensationalist Sup Forums IS DARKWEBZ AR15 IS A NAZI ASSAULT RIFLE etc garbage.

> CTR been replaced on Sup Forums by a Trump equivalent?
Implying that's not what's been going on since 2006.

How does the EO being "poorly written" make it unconstitutional? And how the fuck could you determine the penmanship or the constitutionality of the EO if you admittedly haven't read it?

RUSSIAN HAX0R5!!

Judge should be hanged

We will never get anywhere if we keep treating traitors with kid gloves. This judge and any mayor who harbors illegals should be sentenced to a traitor's fate.

Here we have a case where if you perceive the article as pro-Trump then you perceive it as well-written. Maybe if you read more often instead of screaming FAKE NEWS whenever it says something you don't like.

P90 rush B cyka blin

Executive order is supposed to be used for short term, temporary legislation to be in place while congress drafts a law, or for very small legislation that isn't worth congresses time. A temporary (90 day) travel ban with the purpose of giving the different agencies and congress time to change laws/the screening process is not outside the powers of an executive order.

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals
would be an example of executive overreach, as it affects too many people (millions of illegals) for too long of a period (forever).

No one would take you seriously if you go to the extreme.
We should demand for the judge to be impeached.

>penmanship
Top fuckin kek!

Way to not answer the questions I posed. Poorly written is ineffective law. Law that is broad yet not dealing with specifics (i.e. "until we can figure out what's going on."), is unconstitutional because we already know what's going on. There are a lot of resources available to the president on this topic, but of course that would mean turning off fix news and stepping away from his unsecured BlackBerry to do something like read.

top fucking kek

He's hacking this very thread as we speak!

It already takes over seven years for an immigrant from one of the countries on the list to get through all the background checks before being able to actually enter the US.

>Дa пoшёл ты в жoпy гoвнo
google translation:
Yes poshёl you in zhopy govno

Cyka Blyat! Cyka Blyat?

>over seven years
Not nearly long enough.

They're bending the knee after suffering under the Trump hex.

So what, the immigration process was very likely flawed under Obama. It makes sense for Trump to mistrust the Obama after his questionable actions in regard with ISIS and his support for the Muslim brotherhood and the Salafists.

Trump, as someone walking into office does not know what is going on and neither are you aware of the inner workings of the checking system.

Yes poshёl you in zhopy govno

what?

Sounds like a major management problem, it's fixable.

Odd. It's quite a simple phrase, really:
- May you go into the arse, shit.

>her
D U B L I N
U
B
L
I
N

So "I agree with it" is the new standard for real news? Fucking retards

Well he could have attended his daily intelligence briefing more than once a week, before coming into office...

decent? try intelligent.

This judge is going to get fucked out of his job over this.

Which has what to do with the clearing process for immigrants?

Stop weaseling around

No you're a cyka blyat, I'm carrying this fucking team

The impetus of the immigration ban is rooted in some twisted view of national security. If that isn't covered in intelligence briefings...

No "actually reporting facts instead of pushing an agenda by either lying or omission" is actual news.

>...

what is dot dot dot. why are you typing like you have a vagina?

who is this faggot

sam idi v jopu pizda nebritaia

Well then you should be blaming Obama's administration for compiling the list in the first place.
Trump has stated that he doesn't believe the vetting process is sufficient. There are millions of Americans that agree with him. Ordering a temporary halt to ensure the process is sufficient is well within the rights of the POTUS.

Mentioning security briefings has nothing to do with the vetting process itself. They would only confirm what we all know, that these countries have plenty of ISIS supporting terrorists. But we both'd agree that's irrelevant anyway, since EO is not a ban on all countries that have ISIS elements.

There will be a lasting effect. Any terror attack that happens during Trump's presidency will be pinned on dems, since they opened the window. They gave him a great gift with this sad virtue signaling.

>knee jerk emotional response
>ad hominem
Isn't this what leftists do when they lose an argument?

>posting a CNN article
>Following it up with a hot womminz pic to get people to follow the link

how many of you shitters are new? OP fucking use internet archive.

youtube.com/watch?v=kAHzGp2YaFY

It means "fuck you in the ass"

>OPINIONS

Bending of the knee

>This just in: A national crisis! All butt pain remedies are being sold out all over the country. Medical companies can't keep up with the demand. Society is close to collapse!

Was this the Pharmaceutical companies plan all along?

>blame Obama
Yes
>Isis countries
Yes, but refugees are trying to escape Isis. Most have grown up in refugee camps. On average most people seeking asylum in the US have spent 20+ years in a single refugee camp. Millions of Americans does not equal the 60% that disagree. And Isis is funded by US allies in the region, so a sanction on Jordan or Saudi Arabia would make more sense.

>Yes, but refugees are trying to escape Isis.

Most of those who are coming to the US are not refugees. The easiest way to escape ISIS is to move to Turkey/Jordan/Lebanon or even Europe.
Or to one of the goverment controlled zones away from the fighting.
I mean only literally millions have done so successfully.

So we agree, those are not refugees. They were when they moved away from the war zone, not 7 years later.
7 Years, the number you claimed: >On average most people seeking asylum in the US have spent 20+ years in a single refugee camp.
If you lived somewhere safely for 20 years, you are no longer a refugee, you are an economical migrant looking to improve your economic standing.

>so a sanction on Jordan or Saudi Arabia would make more sense.
Jordan doesn't help ISIS, and sanctions on KSA have NOTHING to do with preventing ISIS elements from migrating to the US or the US vetting process.
It should be done anyway, but it's completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

Core issue us, with Obamas support for the Muslim brotherhood and Salafist elements there is no way to be sure the vetting process he implemented were sufficient without going through them. A process that takes time.

How long the migrants have been living in camps in Iraq is irrelevant
Sanctions on KSA are irreverent
Security briefings on the progress of ISIS are irrelevant.

The only thing relevant is the questions, are the measures enough? And the only way to make sure is to temporary halt immigration and make sure the process is good enough.

It's pretty shocking you're dismayed over this simple thing, a POTUS making sure the process under his oversight are implemented well.

>trying to escape Isis.
>spent 20+ years in a single refugee camp
You're a funny guy, user. How long has ISIS been going, now?

In Europe at least, approximately *fuck all* of the refugees have ever been to Syria in their lives. The minscule proportion that have are not from ISIS controlled areas in particular, but anywhere where an insolent shameless bastard might live. That famous dead kid on the beach is from a Kurdish area where ISIS have only briefly been a major threat. His family had been living perfectly safely in Turkish territory for a long time, too. Most of the migrants are actually from really farflung places, like Eritrea, Pakistan and Afghanistan, for whom the Syrian Civil War is just a pathetic excuse to be used on the stupider Europeans.

You're right about Saudi Arabia, though. And Qatar and the Emirates.

Is nobody going to point out the article was written by Kayleigh? That's why it's not total garbage.