What's new

Trump bars people from 7 countries entering the US

The judge has just blocked the ban.


Do you guys think it was un-constitution to block refugees from countries with prominently Muslims? Does that not in a way discriminate against the religion?




[tweet]827684700504326144[/tweet]
 
That is why we have checks and balances folks. The constitution and our form of government, doing what it is supposed to. Not surprised.
 
The blame game that the Rs and Ds play does not concern me. That is their problem.

It concerns me just because it keeps them from doing anything meaningful.
 
Can Trump change the Constitution?

He has very little power in regard to the Constitution.

The last time there was an Amendment to the constitution was in 1992 which basically said that any change in congressional pay would not take effect until the next term. That rule was first proposed in 1789.

Of over 11,000 attempts to change the constitution we only have 27 amendments, and that's counting the Bill of Rights which counts as the first ten amendments. So really, 17 times we've changed the U.S. Constitution since the Bill of Rights. Much of that happened around the Civil War.

We don't change our Constitution on a whim. Trump will not be changing anything.

A little trivia, there has only been one Amendment to the Constitution that has ever been undone.

In general the Constitution and especially the Amendments are constraints on our federal government. They define the role of government, usually by specifically mentioning what it cannot do, or the limit to which it can act. Only once in our history has the Constitution placed a control on the people. The 18th Amendment prohibited alcohol. The 21st Amendment deleted the 18th Amendment from our Constitution.

Our Constitution limits our government, not the people.

Trump has been pretty clear in that he doesn't understand, doesn't respect, and doesn't give half a **** about the Constitution. He's about to get an education.
 
The judge has just blocked the ban.


Do you guys think it was un-constitution to block refugees from countries with prominently Muslims? Does that not in a way discriminate against the religion?




[tweet]827684700504326144[/tweet]

It's interesting, and somewhat confusing to me, that a federal judge in Boston ruled that, even though the immigration directive states we will favor refugees of religions that constitute a minority in their country of origin, that this is not religious favoritism because we could admit Muslims from countries where Christianity is the majority faith. But, what confuses me there is I don't think any of the 7 nations singled out have Christian majorities. But, that judge's ruling represents a victory for Trump, while the Washington state ruling blocks the ban nationwide at the moment. Trump's Justice Department will challenge of course. It will be interesting to see what happens at our airports in the meantime....

https://www.kansas.com/news/business/article130751154.html
 
the good thing is that all this legal wrangling and signing of executive orders to block successive judicial orders is keep him busy and distracted from other disastrous decisions

some enterprising entrepreneur should make a game of it and sell it on the app store
 
the good thing is that all this legal wrangling and signing of executive orders to block successive judicial orders is keep him busy and distracted from other disastrous decisions

some enterprising entrepreneur should make a game of it and sell it on the app store

u really think that it keeps him busy??
he is going at break neck speed
 
It's interesting, and somewhat confusing to me, that a federal judge in Boston ruled that, even though the immigration directive states we will favor refugees of religions that constitute a minority in their country of origin, that this is not religious favoritism because we could admit Muslims from countries where Christianity is the majority faith. But, what confuses me there is I don't think any of the 7 nations singled out have Christian majorities. But, that judge's ruling represents a victory for Trump, while the Washington state ruling blocks the ban nationwide at the moment. Trump's Justice Department will challenge of course. It will be interesting to see what happens at our airports in the meantime....

https://www.kansas.com/news/business/article130751154.html

I wonder what would happen if Trump decides to include a country with Christian majority in addition to the 7 Muslim majority countries? Would he be able to argue that he's not singling out Muslims and get around the Constitution that way?


If he does do that, what grounds can the judges rule against his Executive order? (as they won't be able to argue that he discriminates against Muslims)
 
I wonder what would happen if Trump decides to include a country with Christian majority in addition to the 7 Muslim majority countries? Would he be able to argue that he's not singling out Muslims and get around the Constitution that way?


If he does do that, what grounds can the judges rule against his Executive order? (as they won't be able to argue that he discriminates against Muslims)

As of late last night, a Federal Court of Appeals has rejected Trump's effort to overturn Judge Robart's order.

Basically, Robart's ruling amounts to saying there is no constitutional way to enforce an unconstitutional order...

https://www.slate.com/articles/news..._judge_robart_blocked_trump_s_muslim_ban.html
 
Quick question to someone who's familar with this.



Can't Trump just dismantle the 'refugee' program all together (if he wanted to)? That's not discriminating, therefore it wouldn't be un-constitutional right?


I mean there is no requirement that a country has to take in refugees is there?


I'm just playing devil's advocate here to see how far he can take it.
 
Back
Top