BREAKING: Ninth Circuit Backs Up Judge Robards, Upholds Suspension Of Travel PlansteemCreated with Sketch.

in politics •  2 years ago

Not much yet on this; here's what came down the Zero-Hedge pipe:

The ruling by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is out, and it unanimously upheld a temporary suspension of President Donald Trump's order that restricted travel from seven Muslim-majority countries. The ruling came in a challenge to Trump's order filed by the states of Washington and Minnesota.

The U.S. Supreme Court will likely determine the case's final outcome.

In its ruling, the Court found that the U.S. will remain open to refugees and visa holders from seven Muslim-majority countries while the Trump administration fights to reinstate a travel ban in the name of national security.


In a way, this was not a surprising ruling. The Ninth Circuit appeals court has a reputation of being one of the most liberal appeals courts in the nation. California conservatives, what's left of them, have special reason to be bitter about the 9th circuit. It once struck down a referedum-driven Constitutional Amendment too the state of California's Constitution in 2008. (Proposition 8.]

So, as expected, it's going to the Supreme Court. Open question: will Judge Neil Gorsuch be appointed by then, or will it be heard by an eight-member Court?

As I write, The Donald has yet to react on Twitter....

EDIT: That Zero-Hedge link now has a Scribd file of the full ruling, and has highlighted this "money quote":

In short, although courts owe considerable deference to the President’s policy determinations with respect to immigration and national security, it is beyond question that the federal judiciary retains the authority to adjudicate constitutional challenges to executive action.

Will this cause a fight? We'll see!

EDIT 2: And here's the Trumpster!


(Image from here.)

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  


Heh, heh; nice!

But where's the kangaroo?

Interesting that there was no consistency with the 9th's ruling on Arizona.

I'd like to see Congress start impeaching these judges who act outside the law for partisan purposes


Interesting that there was no consistency with the 9th's ruling on Arizona.

That there is solid grounds to send it to the Supreme Court.

I'd like to see Congress start impeaching these judges who act outside the law for partisan purposes.

Hmm...we might see that, tho' it's doubtful if the Pubbies in the House & Senate have the stomach for it. Given that judges are not Bill Clinton, it might send enough of a message if one were impeached (by the House) but not convicted (by the Senate).

FYI, the procedure's spelled out here:


Considering how the pubbies rubberstamped so many democrap judges/smh

Thanks for that link, I'll take a look more reference in my library. siiiiiiigh.



Well: the judgment itself is long, but the Ballotpedia link isn't: you can get through it in a couple of minutes or so.


I think I'll leave it for tomorrow ;>

Just saw a comment that Trump should close down ALL immigration temporarily

let's see the COC howl when their H1B wage saboteurs aren't admitted


Wow: that would be something!

Time for court reform.
One plan I've seen is to break up the 9th Circus into two regions because it is overworked. This would create a 12th Circuit Court for the Rocky Mountain States and Washington and necessitate the appointment of a new batch of presumably more ethical judges.

Better yet, the jurisdiction of the courts should be non-regional so that you can't court shop - your case goes to a random court.

Better yet, divide up the responsibility of courts by legal area of responsibility. Put the 9th Circus in charge of something harmless. Put the 12th in charge of reviewing presidential orders and require the judges to have top security clearances (which would rule out many radical candidates with questionable pasts.)

Article III, Section 2.2 of the U.S. Constitution:
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction.

Congratulations @nxtblg! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

Award for the number of comments received

Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honnor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here

If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

If you want to support the SteemitBoard project, your upvote for this notification is welcome!

So, what's position now after 11 months hehe :D i just found old post of yours :)


Jeez, I plumb forgot. Nice to meet you!


Hehe, Nice to meet you to please be connect for my motivational posts.