Started By
Message

re: CAIR to sue Trump over executive order

Posted on 1/30/17 at 12:33 pm to
Posted by ladyluckUGA
Member since Feb 2014
6365 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 12:33 pm to
CAIR:
-open EO
-Ctrl+F "Muslim"
0 results

then find out 7 countries were chosen by Obama Admin not Trump's

then find out this order only affects 12% of world muslim population

then find out its only for 90 days

then find out Trump is 100% within his legal rights to make the order (8 U.S. Code 1182).

Posted by BamaAtl
South of North
Member since Dec 2009
21894 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 12:33 pm to
quote:

124/140,000,000 people affected by the EO were helped by the stay.


Small steps.

Why are you not glad that 124 people had an illegal action against them stayed?
Posted by Pax Regis
Alabama
Member since Sep 2007
12932 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 12:34 pm to
quote:

And under the 1968 INA no person can be excluded from an otherwise valid visa due to country of origin/residence.


You seriously cannot be this dumb. Who gets to decide what is a valid visa and the criteria needed to issue said visa?
Posted by Sun God
Member since Jul 2009
44874 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 12:34 pm to
Looking at the news with all the protestors I figured 124,000 were being held
Posted by Pecker
Rocky Top
Member since May 2015
16674 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 12:34 pm to
quote:

This is not true - it was in no way of their own free will, it was often while handcuffed.

Many others with valid visas have not been allowed to board their flights to the US.





The administration already said those with legal residence and valid green cards could enter the US. Why are you lying?
Posted by BamaAtl
South of North
Member since Dec 2009
21894 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 12:35 pm to
quote:

Pax Regis


Once the visa has already been issued, and a person is trying to get onto a flight? The decision's been made.

Seriously, how dumb are you?
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
118755 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 12:35 pm to
quote:

Feds have exclusive jurisdiction.

Executive runs the show on immigration.

CAIR will lose, as will the ACLU.



Liberal Washington University law Professor Jonathan Turley tried to explain this to a bunch of foreigners and an ACLU lawyer on a CNN panel this weekend and their heads exploded.

(On a side note, CNN always has panels full of foreigners telling us what American values are an what is and what's not constitutional. )
Posted by GetCocky11
Calgary, AB
Member since Oct 2012
51270 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 12:36 pm to
quote:

Nice try. The Executive has the sole constitutional authority to regulate immigration. The bill of rights does not apply to non-citizens.


Might have an issue with any sort of religious preference though. If we let in a Christian refugee but not a Muslim refugee simply because we are giving preference to Christians, there might be an issue.
This post was edited on 1/30/17 at 12:37 pm
Posted by Jbird
In Bidenville with EthanL
Member since Oct 2012
73434 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 12:36 pm to


Initial court rulings protect travelers caught in limbo, but a full derailing of the president's directive will be tough.

One Muslim-rights group, the Council on American Islamic Relations, said it planned a new federal lawsuit Monday charging that Trump’s order is unconstitutional because it amounts to thinly veiled discrimination against Muslims.

That suit could face an uphill battle because courts have rarely accorded constitutional rights to foreigners outside the U.S. However, foreign citizens who are permanent U.S. residents generally have a stronger claim to recourse in the courts. In addition, legal experts say U.S. citizen relatives of foreigners could have legal standing to pursue a case charging religious discrimination.

Still, presidents have broad discretion over the nation's immigration and refugee policy. A 1952 immigration law gives the chief executive the power to bar "any class" of immigrants from the country if allowing them is deemed "detrimental to the interests of the United States."
LINK
Posted by BamaAtl
South of North
Member since Dec 2009
21894 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 12:36 pm to
quote:

The administration already said those with legal residence and valid green cards could enter the US.


This administration says many things. Actions often prove that they were lying.

Why are you supporting a lying administration? We have first-hand accounts of people unable to board flights, stranded in countries while they have valid US visas.

Please listen to more than just Breitbart on this. They do not have an interest in telling you the truth.
Posted by Jbird
In Bidenville with EthanL
Member since Oct 2012
73434 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 12:38 pm to
quote:

Why are you supporting a lying administration?
Aren't you the cute one.
Posted by LSURussian
Member since Feb 2005
126962 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 12:38 pm to
quote:

was never a complete hold, just additional layers of checks that slowed the process to a trickle.
That's a lie.
quote:

As a result of the Kentucky case, the State Department stopped processing Iraq refugees for six months in 2011, federal officials told ABC News – even for many who had heroically helped U.S. forces as interpreters and intelligence assets.

LINK
Posted by Pecker
Rocky Top
Member since May 2015
16674 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 12:39 pm to
quote:

This administration says many things. Actions often prove that they were lying.

Why are you supporting a lying administration? We have first-hand accounts of people unable to board flights, stranded in countries while they have valid US visas.

Please listen to more than just Breitbart on this. They do not have an interest in telling you the truth.


If you are purporting that the administration is lying about letting those with green cards or legal residence enter the US, then please provide evidence that they are preventing those from doing so. The responsibility is on you.

Please provide a link of those still being prevented.
Posted by GoCrazyAuburn
Member since Feb 2010
34884 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 12:39 pm to
quote:

This administration says many things. Actions often prove that they were lying.

Why are you supporting a lying administration? We have first-hand accounts of people unable to board flights, stranded in countries while they have valid US visas.


And you have proof that these were due to the text of the EO and not misinterpretation in the field? You know, the type of misinterpretation that would cause the administration to clarify that those actions were not supported under the EO?
Posted by GRTiger
On a roof eating alligator pie
Member since Dec 2008
62920 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 12:40 pm to
quote:

And under the 1968 INA no person can be excluded from an otherwise valid visa due to country of origin/residence.


Those with valid Visas were exempted in the EO. Those who don't have a valid Visa won't be getting one without an exemption during the ban. The EO also never once mentions religion.

quote:

Oops.
Posted by BBONDS25
Member since Mar 2008
48284 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 12:44 pm to
the INA? For refugees?! Man...

Not to mention the other issues with claiming that trumps Trump.

Where did you go to law school my man?
This post was edited on 1/30/17 at 12:47 pm
Posted by Pax Regis
Alabama
Member since Sep 2007
12932 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 12:54 pm to
Just so we can be clear - You are talking about the tiny sliver of time window last week between the issuance of visas and their arrival? Is that correct? If not be clear what you think the executive has the power to do or not do.
Posted by Tchefuncte Tiger
Bat'n Rudge
Member since Oct 2004
57205 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 1:05 pm to
Washington State is suing as well. I'll LMAO when the courts ultimately side with Trump.
Posted by Loserman
Member since Sep 2007
21862 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 1:24 pm to
quote:

Might have an issue with any sort of religious preference though. If we let in a Christian refugee but not a Muslim refugee simply because we are giving preference to Christians, there might be an issue.


One of the many criteria for granting refugee asylum in the US is religious persecution.
The religions that are under the greatest persecution in that area are Christians, Yazidis, and Druze. Giving priority asylum to the most persecuted groups is not against the law.

This post was edited on 1/30/17 at 1:25 pm
Posted by 4Ghost
Member since Sep 2016
8518 posts
Posted on 1/30/17 at 1:55 pm to
Some of your better work!
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 4Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram