Civics 101

Civics 101

Other urls found in this thread:

law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleii.
law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii
whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/27/executive-order-protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states
youtube.com/watch?v=T_foQoCHQq8
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Immigration isn't subject to judicial review

Find me the part where the Judicial gets to question the merits of an EO when it comes to national security. Their job is to asses legality and constitutionality and nothing more.

Jewbitch & Pedophillic judges who use the bench to create law aren't operating within their Judicial function.

It sounds like you answered your own question almost.

nice brain reddo

yea ...obama pretty much destroyed this concept.....thanks eric holder

See

You want a redpill on the constitution? It says nothing about granting the President executive orders.

law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleii.

Activist judges are expanding the function of the judiciary, using interpretation of the law to make political statements/changes.

The only people undermining the judiciary are activist judges.

Only two of those checks and balances are accountable to the people.

I wonder which of the three runs off doing retarded shit all the time.

Doesn't say the courts get to make nat'l sec decisions either, because that is far outside of the scope of their powers.

Fucking this. Executive orders are bullshit emergency powers.

FUCKING ENFORCE THE CONSTITUTION CONGRESS

You know the difference between procedures and provisions right? You are not posting on Sup Forums without a basic law degree are you user?

Actually it does:
>The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.

law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii

>violate the spirit of the law on a technicality
You're one of those people who does questionable shit and then says "welp it's not illegal hyuck hyuck" aren't you?

Wow OP youre right
And that is exactly whats happening!

I cant wait for them to review all the laws and then reaffirm that what Trump is doing is constitutional and legal :^)

The judicial does not make the decisions, only reviews whether or not the decision is constiutional, which of course it is. Is there any argument against whether the president can ban travel from specific countries? I havnt seen any.

You failed to state their power and purpose, only their jurisdiction. You said a whole lot of nothing.

The problem with the order is not that travel bans are illegal. Travel bans are legal. This one is not because it turns away immigrants and refugees immediately and leaves them stateless, which is the illegal part.

Immigration isn't subject to Executive reviews either unless it harms the country.
None of the countries banned have sent people who have committed terror attacks since 9/11.


A president needs a legitimate reason to issue and executive order.

The judicial power you're talking about means they get to assess legality and constitutionality, like I said before. Not judge the effectiveness of the measures the president takes, which every judge so far has done.

I would be A-okay with Trump not being able to use EOs if no one else is and all past ones were completely revoked (if still applicable)

But since that isnt happening Im just glad that the we have a benevolent dictator

Show me evidence of those judges being hardline political activists or stop shilling this "JDUGES ARE ACTIVISTS"!!!! bullshit.

Trump will just do a 360 and go after Saudi now. All part of the plan

The guy I was responding to stated the Supreme court has no authority to question Executive orders, and replied with a direct quote stating it does.
>Not judge the effectiveness of the measures the president takes, which every judge so far has done.
The (((MSM))) is discussing effectiveness, but the courts are discussing the legality.

Paint all of those buildings RED!

I don't see how else you could interpret the court demanding evidence that travelers from these countries have committed terrorist acts in the past.

The 9/11 "hijackers" came from Saudi Arabia, a country not on the ban list.

Because there's a statute that says something about if the president deems the citizens being a risk, then he can restrict travel.

Okay you're either being paid to post here or you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what "Death to America" means.

So those countries aren't on the terrorism watch list for a legitimate reason?

okay i support trump but the stupidity of this board when it comes to lega issues is r/politics levels

no, he does not have a right to ban citizens he deems a threat. He has the right to ban "any class of aliens"

Are green card holders a class of aliens? I do not think so, they are legal residents

Are visa holders a class of aliens? maybe, i don't know

the EO would be lawful but for the ban of legal residents, which green card holders are

you know the executive order doesn't ban green card holders, right?

>if the president deems the citizens being a risk
They're not citizens. Anyway, the president does see a risk, he says so in the order and cited the law you're talking about. What the judges are trying to do is is to substitute their judgement for the president's when it comes to the danger presented from these seven countries. That's where both courts and all four judges are completely out of line.

Obviously he doesn't. Shame, that.

>He has the right to ban "any class of aliens"
The law uses the conditional:
>Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States
If there is no threat meeting this condition, the rest doesn't apply.
It doesn't specifically mention green card holders, nor does it specifically mention Muslims, or people wearing brown shoes, or people born on an odd day. That's an unnecessary qualifier.

It restricts people coming in from those countries. That includes green card holders.

The president can bar anyone of any class from entering the country

he did originally and the plan language of the executive order , im pretty sure, includes green card holders

hey, im not against it but the fumble is real

also, liberal justices, including those on the surpeme court, will try to prove a discriminatory intent argument with the executive order. aka dass racist. Intent will be easy to show....

hey im for it and in my opinion constitutional but there's legal arguments against it. i hope reason triumphs but liberals man

see
about intent
they cannot ban citizens and most likely green card holders and visa holders idk rlly.

"so called" checks and balances... Sad!

Here's the text of the executive order:
whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/27/executive-order-protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states

control + f "green", you won't find it

It vaguely alludes to them under the term "Other Immigration Benefits, when describing suspension of documents issued, but doesn't ever specifically mention them. I think it was intentionally vague.
>Suspension of Issuance of Visas and Other Immigration Benefits to Nationals of Countries of Particular Concern

You didn't answer my post The judgement of whether said aliens constitute a detriment to the United States is is left the the president and the president exclusively. The statute doesn't say "Whenever the President (and the 9th circuit court agree) that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States." It says the president, because the commander and chief has authority when it comes to immigration unless his orders are found to be unconstitutional or illegal.

youtube.com/watch?v=T_foQoCHQq8

An alien is someone from another country or nation that comes to this one

An alien can be a legal resident and still an alien

Why do you get your own flag?