Supreme Court Rules For Trump In Travel Ban Case

[exhaustgases]

I was referring to your own "not to be a jackass" comment.

Oh my God! I should have picked up on that, with the finger-wave emoji and all.

Are you a troll like sandy who thrives on people telling you what a schmuck you are? It seems to happen quite a bit. Oh...

I do I admit, get a chuckle how many struggle to find fresh names/labels, in an attempt to toss an insult my direction.

Hint:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0l7RFsde2M

Its one of the reasons you frequent here, you like it. Got anymore selfy's?

[j-c-c]

WINNING!!!! BOOM, BOOM, BOOM, KABOOM!!

Supreme Court rules for Trump in challenge to his administration's travel ban

The ruling concerned the third iteration of President Donald Trump's immigration restriction.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/26/supreme ... -case.html!

The U.S. Supreme Court

The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday in favor of President Donald Trump in Trump v. Hawaii, the controversial case regarding concerning Trump's September order to restrict travel to the U.S. for citizens of several majority Muslim countries.

The case has been central to the Trump administration's immigration policy, presenting a key test of the president's campaign promise to restrict immigration and secure America's borders.

The immigration restriction is the Trump administration's third, and affects people from Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen. * was dropped from the list of affected countries in April.

Previous iterations of the ban were revised after facing challenges in court.

Hawaii alleged that the immigration restriction was motivated by religious discrimination, noting that a majority of the countries included in the ban have primarily Muslim populations. During oral argument in April, Neil Katyal, attorney for the challengers in the case, cited Trump's post-election tweets about the case, and argued that the travel restriction amounted to a "Muslim ban."

The government argued that "it would be the most ineffective Muslim ban that one could possibly imagine."

"Not only does it exclude the vast majority of the Muslim world, it also omits three Muslim-majority countries that were covered by past orders, including Iraq, *, and Sudan," Noel Francisco, the solicitor general, told the court.

Among the tweets at issue in the case is one from September in which the president wrote that the "travel ban into the United States should be far larger, tougher and more specific-but stupidly, that would not be politically correct!"

Katyal also cited Trump's retweeting of what Katyal called "virulent anti-Muslim videos" in November of last year. The videos had titles such as "Muslim migrant beats up Dutch boy on crutches!" and "Muslim Destroys a Statue of Virgin Mary!"

The president has said that the ban is not about Islam.

"This is not about religion—this is about terror and keeping our country safe," the president said in January, after facing criticism over the first iteration of the order.

That initial order, signed in the first weeks of the Trump administration, led to days of protests around the country, with thousands gathering at airports to demonstrate.

Thought we covered this? Is there an echo here?

"The president has said that the ban is not about Islam."

The quintessential example of "blind faith" or outright brain washing

[Firedome8]

[David Redszus]

160810170046-trump-quote-eight-muslims-super-169.jpg

Could you please indicate the source of your post?

[David Redszus]

Since ex-president Obuma has announced travel plan to include Kenya, could Trump prevent his return under the ban on the basis that he is a Muslim terrorist who has harmed the US?

Could be tied up in court for quite some time while keeping Obuma out of the US.

[lefty o]

Since ex-president Obuma has announced travel plan to include Kenya, could Trump prevent his return under the ban on the basis that he is a Muslim terrorist who has harmed the US?

Could be tied up in court for quite some time while keeping Obuma out of the US.

that would be funny as can be!

[Firedome8]

160810170046-trump-quote-eight-muslims-super-169.jpg

Could you please indicate the source of your post?

Donald Trump campaign website, Statement on preventing Muslim immigration, Dec. 7, 2017

ABC News, Christmas Party May Have Triggered San Bernardino Terror Attack: Police, Dec. 1, 2016

NBC News, Mosque Members Say Shooter Syed Farook Seemed 'Peaceful,' Devout, Dec. 3, 2015

PolitiFact, Trump cites shaky survey in call to ban Muslims from entering US, Dec. 9, 2017

NBC News, Transcript, Meet the Press, July 24, 2016

PolitiFact, Trump's travel ban executive order, take 2, March 6, 2017

PolitiFact, Suspend immigration from terror-prone places, last updated March 16, 2017

The Hill, Kamala Harris: 'Make no mistake — this is a Muslim ban', Jan. 27, 2017

PolitiFact, Is Donald Trump's executive order a 'Muslim ban'?, Feb. 3, 2017

White House, President Donald J. Trump Statement Regarding Recent Executive Order Concerning Extreme Vetting, Jan. 29, 2017

White House, Statement by Press Secretary Sean Spicer, Jan. 31, 2017

Fox News Insider, VP Pence Defends 'Extreme Vetting' Policy: It's Not a 'Muslim Ban', Feb. 2, 2017

Today, UN Ambassador Nikki Haley on TODAY: 'I will never support a Muslim ban', March 16, 2017

[RevTheory]

Too bad for you unhinged, triggered little snowflake Trump trolls, the Supreme Court rules on the legality of the document sitting in front of them. Deal with our win!

[j-c-c]

4-5 along Party lines is a win in your eyes, but this nation has long list of important at the times, rulings with a much larger margins ,that all got overturned, and rightfully so, for instance:
https://www.infoplease.com/history-and- ... guson-1896

Count your chickens Quickly.

[exhaustgases]

4-5 along Party lines is a win in your eyes, but this nation has long list of important at the times, rulings with a much larger margins ,that all got overturned, and rightfully so, for instance:
https://www.infoplease.com/history-and- ... guson-1896

Count your chickens Quickly.

No reason to count chickens, communism is in a downward spiral in this country, its like a plane out of control, then as the ground comes closer, the out come is then evident.

[j-c-c]

4-5 along Party lines is a win in your eyes, but this nation has long list of important at the times, rulings with a much larger margins ,that all got overturned, and rightfully so, for instance:
https://www.infoplease.com/history-and- ... guson-1896

Count your chickens Quickly.

No reason to count chickens, communism is in a downward spiral in this country, its like a plane out of control, then as the ground comes closer, the out come is then evident.

Sorry, maybe I should have said, count your slaves quickly?

[David Redszus]

Count your chickens Quickly.

Sorry, maybe I should have said, count your slaves quickly?

What in the hell do chickens and slaves have to do with protecting our country against Islamic terrorism?

The recent SCOTUS decision firmly established the right of the president to limit immigration on what ever
basis he sees fit to protect the country as clearly provided by our constitution.

It will never be overturned no matter how many chickens or slaves you might have vote for Dimwiticrats.