Courts let Trump travel ban go partially into effect....
Nov 14, 2017 16:43:36 #
Court lets Trump travel ban go partially into effect
Thomson Reuters
Lawrence Hurley
Nov 14th 2017 12:08PM
X
WASHINGTON, Nov 13 (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court in California on Monday let part of President Donald Trump's latest travel ban go into effect, ruling that the government can bar entry of people from six Muslim-majority countries if they have no connections to the United States.
A three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals partially granted a Trump administration request to block at least temporarily a judge's ruling that had put the new ban on hold. Trump's ban was announced on Sept. 24 and replaced two previous versions that had been impeded by federal courts.
SEE ALSO: Trump throws wrench into GOP tax reform plans with tweet on Obamacare mandate
The action means the ban will apply to people from Iran, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia and Chad who do not have connections to the United States.
Those connections are defined as family relationships and "formal, documented" relationships with U.S.-based entities such as universities and resettlement agencies. Those with family relationships that would allow entry include grandparents, grandchildren, brothers-in-law, sisters-in-law, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews and cousins of people in the United States.
The ruling does not affect people from the two other countries listed in Trump's ban, North Korea and Venezuela.
6 TWEETS
President Trump revives travel ban argument
See Gallery
The state of Hawaii, which sued to block the restrictions, argued that federal i*********n l*w did not give Trump the authority to impose them on six of those countries. U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson in Honolulu ruled last month that Hawaii was likely to succeed with that argument.
Trump issued his first travel ban targeting several Muslim-majority countries in January, just a week after he took office, and then issued a revised one after the first was blocked by the courts. The second one expired in September after a long court fight and was replaced with another revised version.
Trump has said the travel ban is needed to protect the United States from terrorism by Muslim militants. As a candidate, Trump had promised "a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States."
Critics of the travel ban in its various iterations call it a "Muslim ban" that violates the U.S. Constitution by discriminating on the basis of religion.
Slideshow preview image
21 PHOTOS
Protests against Trump's proposed travel ban
See Gallery
The 9th Circuit is due to hear oral arguments in the case on Dec. 6. In a parallel case from Maryland, a judge also ruled against the Trump administration and partially blocked the ban from going into effect.
An appeal in the Maryland case is being heard on Dec. 8 by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia. The Maryland case was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, which represents several advocacy groups, including the International Refugee Assistance Project.
In announcing the newest travel restrictions, the White House had portrayed them as necessary consequences for countries that did not meet new requirements for vetting of immigrants and issuing of visas. Those requirements were shared in July with foreign governments, which had 50 days to make improvements if needed, the White House said.
http://www.u.s.news.com
Interesting!!!! now lets see what happens, when this ban does go into affect!!completely how far will Trump go with this, and will it work. What do y'all think?
Thomson Reuters
Lawrence Hurley
Nov 14th 2017 12:08PM
X
WASHINGTON, Nov 13 (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court in California on Monday let part of President Donald Trump's latest travel ban go into effect, ruling that the government can bar entry of people from six Muslim-majority countries if they have no connections to the United States.
A three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals partially granted a Trump administration request to block at least temporarily a judge's ruling that had put the new ban on hold. Trump's ban was announced on Sept. 24 and replaced two previous versions that had been impeded by federal courts.
SEE ALSO: Trump throws wrench into GOP tax reform plans with tweet on Obamacare mandate
The action means the ban will apply to people from Iran, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia and Chad who do not have connections to the United States.
Those connections are defined as family relationships and "formal, documented" relationships with U.S.-based entities such as universities and resettlement agencies. Those with family relationships that would allow entry include grandparents, grandchildren, brothers-in-law, sisters-in-law, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews and cousins of people in the United States.
The ruling does not affect people from the two other countries listed in Trump's ban, North Korea and Venezuela.
6 TWEETS
President Trump revives travel ban argument
See Gallery
The state of Hawaii, which sued to block the restrictions, argued that federal i*********n l*w did not give Trump the authority to impose them on six of those countries. U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson in Honolulu ruled last month that Hawaii was likely to succeed with that argument.
Trump issued his first travel ban targeting several Muslim-majority countries in January, just a week after he took office, and then issued a revised one after the first was blocked by the courts. The second one expired in September after a long court fight and was replaced with another revised version.
Trump has said the travel ban is needed to protect the United States from terrorism by Muslim militants. As a candidate, Trump had promised "a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States."
Critics of the travel ban in its various iterations call it a "Muslim ban" that violates the U.S. Constitution by discriminating on the basis of religion.
Slideshow preview image
21 PHOTOS
Protests against Trump's proposed travel ban
See Gallery
The 9th Circuit is due to hear oral arguments in the case on Dec. 6. In a parallel case from Maryland, a judge also ruled against the Trump administration and partially blocked the ban from going into effect.
An appeal in the Maryland case is being heard on Dec. 8 by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia. The Maryland case was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, which represents several advocacy groups, including the International Refugee Assistance Project.
In announcing the newest travel restrictions, the White House had portrayed them as necessary consequences for countries that did not meet new requirements for vetting of immigrants and issuing of visas. Those requirements were shared in July with foreign governments, which had 50 days to make improvements if needed, the White House said.
http://www.u.s.news.com
Interesting!!!! now lets see what happens, when this ban does go into affect!!completely how far will Trump go with this, and will it work. What do y'all think?Nov 14, 2017 16:50:36 #
proud republican
Loc: RED CALIFORNIA
atomikmom wrote:
Court lets Trump travel ban go partially into effe... (show quote)
Its about time.....It should of been done from day 1
Nov 14, 2017 17:26:35 #
proud republican wrote:
Its about time.....It should of been done from day 1
Nov 14, 2017 17:57:35 #
atomikmom wrote:
Court lets Trump travel ban go partially into effe... (show quote)
Anything is a start. The next thing is knowing where the Muslim extremists are here, now. The coming terror incidents both Muslim and home grown, where are they planning the next attack. The last thing to do is, how to make the liberals understand what they have allowed to happen and make corrections.
Nov 14, 2017 18:03:22 #
proud republican wrote:
Its about time.....It should of been done from day 1
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.