E

As for the small differences in the EOs of Carter. BHO and Trump, they are small and still within the rights of the President to execute. The courts are obviously biased as all Democratic installed judges voted against the President, and most of their reasoning has been obviously against the President himself.

Hopefully, during this time since the first blocking of his EO, President Trump has gotten better vetting in place. But this case must go on to the Supreme Court so they can rule on whether single Judges and single appeals courts can stop measures that are clearly within the rights and duties of the President. We must do this so that he can execute measures for our safety not just in matters like this, but matters where serious danger is eminent. We can't allow wild rulings by an out of control judge or an appeals court, create blocks and the delays of the judicial process, that endanger America when time can be a matter of creating real danger to America.

PaulPisces Loc: San Francisco

Please read my earlier post, E.

SCOTUS generally will take cases only where the lower circuit courts are in disagreement. This is not the case here, so it seems unlikely SCOTUS will agree to review the case.
I could be wrong, and that would be a VERY interesting case indeed should SCOTUS decide to review it.

E

I did reread. SCOTUS can take any case where they feel a constitutional issue is at stake. The judges involved didn't have anywhere near the information that President Trump had at his disposal. There was almost no reliable vetting of these refugees from those countries. Under BHO, there was absolute religious bias in who he gave refugee status. Overwhelmingly Muslin and very few Christians, even though the Christians were being persecuted in greater percentages. Why didn't you protest about that? We did.

There was virtually no instances of any Christian refugees creating any problems, but Muslim refugees were not what they pretended to be, not overwhelmingly women and children but mostly men, and these refugees around the world have caused violent crimes.

Your opinion on President Trump's right to write that EO is obviously biased as is that of the courts that have ruled on this case. You back Carter and BHO for almost the same thing, and then we have to listen to subtle differences. Religion was not taken into account in the writing, although President Trump might have had Islam in the back of his mind in creating those two EOs. He had an absolute right to consider where the refugees were coming from and that they weren't being properly vetted. There is no doubt that almost all of the terrorist activity in the whole world is the result of Muslim extremists. The president is charged with protecting Americans from foreign invasion. And that is exactly what was being done under BHO, a permitted foreign invasion without any vetting.

If any of these so called refugees were to be the cause of domestic terrorism, you'd be the first to blame President Trump.

While Islam is a religion, it is also a political movement whereby they seek to turn the world into Muslims, at the barrel of a gun of the edge of a sword. This is backed by their one recognized place of authority, the Koran, not our Constitution. They are allowed by that same book to lie and cheat and kill without guilt as long as it advances Islam and creates Sharia law, which is against our Constitution.

When I read about people like the few on OPP who try to defend this religion and these wackadoodle judges, I have to wonder, whose side are you on. It doesn't appear to be Americas.

cheers