U.S. Supreme Court upholds OKs Trump's travel ban; rejects Muslim bias claim

Hm. I wonder how Merrick Garland would have voted...

Very good to see that judges in Hawaii will no longer be able to put Americans at risk. This ruling should enable President Trump to enact sweeping immigration restrictions.

Finally the Supreme Court brought some sense back with the ruling. I knew the decision would be in Trump’s favor.

Very flawed ruling, akin to a customer complaining his burger has no meat and the restaurant replying that it has a bun.

The issue at hand was the impetus behind Trump's blanket ban - that Trump had clearly and on multiple times stated his intention to ban a group based on its religion - not the ability of presidents to ban visitors from certain countries itself, which has been long accepted. Roberts basically said that Trump's statements themselves don't matter; all that matters is that the Trump administration, after multiple attempts, finally managed to craft a ban that accomplished Trump's aim without explicitly stating so.

That makes the repudiation of Korematsu even more pathetic, implying that if the order had been worded differently, it might have been legal. Disgusting, narrow verdict by a bunch of Trump toadies, and nothing for the GOP to celebrate.

Excellent news! Now other civilized countries need to follow suit. Just for peace of minds sake this is a good idea

The issue at hand was the impetus behind Trump's blanket ban - that Trump had clearly and on multiple times stated his intention to ban a group based on its religion - not the ability of presidents to ban visitors from certain countries itself, which has been long accepted. Roberts basically said that Trump's statements themselves don't matter; all that matters is that the Trump administration, after multiple attempts, finally managed to craft a ban that accomplished Trump's aim without explicitly stating so.

I love how liberals try to rationalize their personal interpretation of the decisions of the SC as if doing so will change the outcome.

Looks like that stolen seat is paying off for Republicans.

Sad day, but we will keep fighting the good fight. Trump is just temporary and the misguided policy will be removed in the future.

Looks like that stolen seat is paying off for Republicans.

Ahhh....now it’s stolen, eh? Lol

Sad day, but we will keep fighting the good fight. Trump is just temporary and the misguided policy will be removed in the future.

Maybe in 6 years or maybe not depending on how the terrorism debacle unfolds.

Terrorism? In America? From these countries? Nah. Trump's lawyers couldn't show any threats when asked. That's why the opinion specifically says they are taking no position on it's effectiveness.

Constitutional and within the power of the President. Thank you President Trump.

Well we don't need to pretend. Some brown skinned people were banned from entering the US. That's the win for Trump and his base.

The bigoted will rejoice at this medieval move. It's time now to respond to the rogue nation with sanctions.

It won't be easy but an effort to boycott all American products must come into place. Also, it will be necessary to promote freedoms and tolerance by banning all Americans from entering your place of work, your premises. If you employ any American staff; you must dismiss them from their post.

It's unfair, of course, but you can never be sure you're not harboring a fascist.

If you see one on the street, report them to your local authorities. Just in case.

Security concerns are paramount.

Terrorism? In America?

Dunno, 9/11, Boston, Fort Hood, San Bernardino.....

From these countries? Nah.

So now all the sudden you’re a terrorist expert? I know Liberals are supposedly good everything but....

Trump's lawyers couldn't show any threats when asked. That's why the opinion specifically says they are taking no position on it's effectiveness.

Actually they did, this is the reason why Supreme Court ruled in their favor,if they didn’t have any evidence to back it up the ruling would’ve never been what it is right now. I don’t know why liberals think that they know better than everyone else and they don’t even work in Washington. Lol

A bigot's wet dream.

Dunno, 9/11, Boston, Fort Hood, San Bernardino.....

Las Vegas, Oklahoma, Charlottesville...

https://www.vox.com/world/2017/10/2/16396612/las-vegas-mass-shooting-terrorism-islam

In fact, between 2001 and 2015, more Americans were killed by homegrown right-wing extremists than by Islamist terrorists, according to a study by New America, a nonpartisan think tank in Washington, DC.

Where is the ban on "these people"?

Well we don't need to pretend. Some brown skinned people were banned from entering the US. That's the win for Trump and his base.

Ok, but what about other people from other Muslim nations that can come in. Only 8% are on a “temporary ban.” What about Morocco or Indonesia? They’re Muslim and brown. As a matter fact Indonesia is the largest Muslim nation, why are they not banned? Hundreds of people come from Ethiopia in the Philippines, they are not banned. I know I am not a liberal and as smart as all liberals on this planet, but how is that even remotely racist when one group of dark people are allowed to come in and another group are on a temporary ban, but if they can verify or show on their part that they do extreme vetting they will be allowed to come in, so how is that racist?

Another sad day for democracy - and a shameful decision by the Roberts Court, further cementing its place as one of the worst Supreme Courts in American history.

"Just because I don't discriminate against everybody, that is part of a race, gender, ethnicity, that doesn't mean that I am not discriminating."

Explain that.

"So, this is the beauty of racism and I have always loved this. They always make the exception, right? it's not really you. It's them. It's the other ones, right? It's always the ability to make the exception is what makes racism work so well because it's not logical, so you can't really universally apply it, right? So the idea that somebody could have an exception does not shock me at all when it comes to racism . . . at all."

Charles Blow, CNN (African-American) 6/26/2018

Trump to a cheering crowd in December, 2015:

“Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States"

Now that Trump supporters have a Supreme Court "win", perhaps they could put that proposal into perspective.

Was Trump just BS-ing? He didn't mean it? He was just feeding red meat to Americans who hate Muslims and dark-skinned people?

Or was it just another empty promise that he's been unable to fulfill, like locking up Hillary Clinton and building a big, beautiful wall paid for by Mexico?

Or is the current travel ban a disguised version of Trump's stated intent (as acknowledged by Rudy Giuliani), with more Muslim countries to be added now that the Roberts court has given this one to Trump?

I know what I think.

Another sad day for democracy - and a shameful decision by the Roberts Court, further cementing its place as one of the worst Supreme Courts in American history.

Why? Because they ruled on the constitutional interpretation of the law itself which is what they’re supposed to do and not interject emotional personal feelings in this? This is why the Supreme Court are the last line of rationality in this country because unlike the lower courts, they put aside all emotional feelings involved based on the constitutionality of laws. Liberals judge everything based on emotion, this is why they go nuts, this is why I had to get out of control, this is the way they come up with in saying lows and rulings.

Bass: Actually they did, this is the reason why Supreme Court ruled in their favor,if they didn’t have any evidence to back it up the ruling would’ve never been what it is right now.

So you are saying that Trump showed evidence of the dangers of terrorism from these countries, and the Supreme Court made their decision based on the evidence he presented....and if they didn’t have evidence, the Supreme Court would have ruled in the opposite direction?

This will be rectified when Democrat Maxine Waters becomes president!

The key to this ruling is the validation of “separation of powers”. It is not the role of the judiciary to rule based on how they feel about the decision made or whether they agree with it.

Is the decision made constitutional and does the person making it have that constitutional authority? That’s why judiciary exists. Not to “second guess” the elected executive branch. Don’t like the decisions made? That’s for the voters to deal with.

The court said it’s not their place to tell the President he has no evidence of a threat to national security when he says he does.

This decision will also apply to all the other presidential powers. Is the president legally allowed to take this action under presidential authority? Yes. is the action lawful under the constitution? Yes. Then it’s the presidents decision to make. Huge ruling.

Liberals judge everything based on emotion, this is why they go nuts, this is why I had to get out of control

Please don't get out of control.

It is an emotive situation, granted. But when children are abused by the state, when the state discriminates against a religion and various peoples... when this happens and citizens refuse or don't have the courage to speak out against this modern day fascism... this is an entire nation in peril.

When the only answer is "what about" as the Republicans systematically dismantle safeguards for the people and the planet... this is a new low.

A ban on Muslims coming into the country. And people cheering it on. Next up, a return to segregation?

This decision continues the US slide toward irrelevance in a continually global world, and leads us to miss out on talent and energy of the future, meanwhile divesting from our own education systems, isolating our economy and our people, and driving ourselves closer to armed conflict as we continue to significantly damage the relationships we have with countries all over the world. Trump hasn't won anything, he's conned us all, including the Supreme Court. He won't be around to help us clean up this mess, that is one thing we can be certain of.

I am interested how this decision about presidential powers will relate to other cases outside of immigration. Everything Trump has ever tried to do has a lawsuit.

Now it seems the executive powers have been confirmed for every president, even Trump. The court having to concur with his decisions and him having to provide justification for his choices seems to be over. Which is how it always was, pre-Trump. No more Hawaii judge blocking things 3 times for the entire country.

The court said it’s not their place to tell the President he has no evidence of a threat to national security when he says he does. 

They didn’t tell him that. The court asked if they had evidence of a threat, and they said they did not.

That’s the concern here. The President can ban countries by saying they are a threat without having to produce anything. There are no checks and balances.

Israel could be next tomorrow for Trump. Or the next President.

The US sinks deeper into the swamp of bigotry and religious apartheit. A very sad day indeed.

So you are saying that Trump showed evidence of the dangers of terrorism from these countries, and the Supreme Court made their decision based on the evidence he presented....

Yes and based on the interpretation of the law.

and if they didn’t have evidence, the Supreme Court would have ruled in the opposite direction?

Sorry, emotions don’t get to dictate SC rulings, that’s for the 9th circuit court of appeals to do, even though a big portion of their rulings get overturned.

emotions don’t get to dictate SC rulings

But emotions do apparently get to dictate Trump administration policy. Irrational, negative emotion is the raison d'être of the Trump movement. Everything is for the aggrieved base. Obama not American. Mexicans are rapists and murderers. Snatching kids from their parents will stop MS-13. Build the wall. Lock her up. Stick it to the mainstream media. Foul and inflammatory language is telling it like it is. Watch liberal heads explode. Etc.

That's called "making America great".

That is the 8th Supreme Court decision that liberals have lost in the last 2 weeks.

It seems the law is taking precedence over emotional responses and judicial "second guessing" of presidential decisions.

SuperLib: So you are saying that Trump showed evidence of the dangers of terrorism from these countries, and the Supreme Court made their decision based on the evidence he presented....

Bass: Yes

(end)

Hey Black. Is this true?

My understanding was that the court decided that proof is not required to be shown to judiciary. they simply rule on the policy as written. Policy says action is required because there is a danger, its not for the judiciary to "second guess" that.

So the law in the US is determined purely by politics. A sad situation for the world.

@laguna and my fellow liberals

You all know me well enough, so take the following as offered in good faith : legally this case is neither a vindication for Trump's Muslim Ban, nor the 21st century update of Korematsu.

Legally, if you want to understand why, see here:

http://www.scotusblog.com/2018/06/opinion-analysis-divided-court-upholds-trump-travel-ban/

If you like, I can explain the legalese therein.

So, that's the legal of it. As regards the politics, well, spinners gotta spin.

My take:

I live in the Bay Area. Most liberal attorneys and judges and nearly all of my old law school profs that I have discussed this with, though not in agreement in the Robert's holding, recognize the decision as constitutionally sound, particularly with Kennedy's concurring opinion, n in which he explicitly warned the Trump administration not to try to pull this crap again.

The crap to which I refer is floating an unconstitutional order that the courts reject because of its unconstitutionality, and then dial back the language of the order until it meets legal standards, and the gloating that you got your Muslim Ban v 3. IOW, brand something OrderSkrewRuleofLaw™, then make it legally conform to the law, but the intent behind is not the rule of law. Kennedy gave Trump a freebie. This time. I don't think he will give Trump another.

I agree with the Brier dissent, -- joined by Kagan -- which sends the case back to the lower court to flush out some legally important facts which impact the ultimate legal standing of the Ban v3.

The Sotomajor dissent -- joined by Ginsburg and only Ginsburg -- has legal reasoning is....not good. In fact, not only is it on the whole weaker than the majority opinion penned by Robert's, it included politically salient but largely legally irrelevant rhetoric. I am both surprised and disheartened by a preachiness that is simply beneath both these impressive legal minds.

Such is the times.

But emotions do apparently get to dictate Trump administration policy.

But he’s the President. As Obama said, elections have consequences, on that one, he was right....for once. Anyway, it’s finished, nothing the left can do, deal with it.

Irrational, negative emotion is the raison d'être of the Trump movement.

As if the left are the voice of rationale reasoning.

Everything is for the aggrieved base.

And the name calling and harassment of people are the lefts.

Obama not American. Mexicans are rapists and murderers. Snatching kids from their parents will stop MS-13.

Enforced laws will.

Build the wall.

Yes, No borders, no country.

Lock her up. Stick it to the mainstream media. Foul and inflammatory language is telling it like it is. Watch liberal heads explode. Etc.

Liberals should know a thing or two about that.

That's called "making America great".

Bingo!

It has been said, "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice."

A racist and immoral President, a court cut from the same cloth as the men who rendered the Dread Scott v. Sanford decision of 1857, silly men with tiki torches chanting "blood and soil," hypocritical Evangelical "religious leaders," and feckless Congressional leaders cannot long withstand the hue and cry of the overwhelming majority of people in this nation who hold fast to our birthright of dignity, honor, decency, honesty, fair play, equal standing before the law, equal standing in the market place, and our absolute thirst for a just society. 

Today was a setback. Trump, the Republicans, Limbaugh, Fox & Friends, et. al. rejoice tonight. Sleep sweet. So will we, because we have tightened our grip upon the arc of the moral universe, and it's about to bend. Sooner than you may think......

nationwide injunctions by liberal activist judges are also going to be a thing of the past soon enough. Judge Clarence Thomas said this needs to be looked at, as it is not the intention for one judge to be able to obstruct the entire nation. There was just a ruling on the sanctuary cities issue where the 7th District judge was overruled on a national injunction and now their ruling only applies to Chicago, not the whole country.

I really think liberals will regret taking this travel ban case to the Supreme Court. A lot of choices were available to liberal judges because this issue had not been decided on. Should have left it that way. Now that it has, they are limited in what they can do and rule. Plus this will impact other immigration policies and cases where liberals only defense is they say Trump doesnt have the power to do something.

crazyjoe, yes! Deliverance is coming: Maxine Waters for President!

A racist and immoral President,

Democrats are more racists, they could care less about Blacks or Latinos.

a court cut from the same cloth as the men who rendered the Dread Scott v. Sanford decision of 1857, silly men with tiki torches chanting "blood and soil," hypocritical Evangelical "religious leaders," and feckless Congressional leaders cannot long withstand the hue and cry of the overwhelming majority of people in this nation who hold fast to our birthright of dignity, honor, decency, honesty, fair play, equal standing before the law, equal standing in the market place, and our absolute thirst for a just society. 

Oh, the left, oh, the left, driven by pure emotion.

Today was a setback.

Not for Trump and is followers, it was the right thing to do.

Trump, the Republicans, Limbaugh, Fox & Friends, et. al. rejoice tonight. Sleep sweet. So will we, because we have tightened our grip upon the arc of the moral universe, and it's about to bend. Sooner than you may think......

Yeah, uhhh...ok....morality, next time I'll make a list of the liberal morality. We'll be here for year writing it up. ROFL

Gorsuch was hand picked by Trump. Good decision. Keeping us safe from radical Islamic terror.

Keeping us safe from radical Islamic terror.

Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen - how many terrorist incidents have been carried out on US soil by people from those countries?

Democrats are more racists, they could care less about Blacks or Latinos.

An odd statement to make, given that many Democrats themselves are black and latino. Not to mention millions of Democrat voters.

It's true that the party is the lesser of two evils but let's deal with the current administration.

Is it possible to address the bigotry and discrimination that your President endorses, enables and enacts?

An odd statement to make, given that many Democrats themselves are black and latino. Not to mention millions of Democrat voters.

Not odd at all actually, most Black and Latino leaders haven't done nearly enough to address the concerns and needs of their constituents. Yes, they want their votes and they are loyal voters, they keep voting the same people into office, but they don't do anything for these people.

It's true that the party is the lesser of two evils but let's deal with the current administration.

They have 120 of the exact opposite, racist, toxic polices of segregation, intimidation, oppression and even after all these years, they still haven't learned anything.

Is it possible to address the bigotry and discrimination that your President endorses, enables and enacts?

Like what?

Like what?

The bigotry and discrimination that I've linked here dozens and dozens of times over the last year or so.

The links which I read and research and then post for you to dismiss/ignore, or reply with "what about the Dems"?

Please don't insult my and your intelligence by pretending you don't know anything about your bigot-in-chief.

Bass4funk,

exellent point. There are so many more Muslim majority countries that are known to harbour terrorists or likeminded scum that aren't on the list. More attention needs to put on SE Asia. As this is very close to Australia and NZ they need to adapt a similar approach.

Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen - how many terrorist incidents have been carried out on US soil by people from those countries?

Given their history anger and hate overall towards the West, you don't know if they would send a Jihadist disguised as a refugee, how can we know, those countries don't properly vet. I think the President taking tighter precautions is a good and very important thing.

Former NATO Secretary-General Javier Solana was denied an automatic visa waiver to enter the U.S. because of a trip to Iran.

The 9/11 terrorists came from which country?

That's not the issue. The issue is, we don't vet as well as other countries, we don't have secure borders, now the left has been throwing every obstacle in the Presidents way to hinder him from enforcing these laws and finally, the SC found that the President was within his constitutional authority to enforce them.

As he should have been, as we dont give WAIVERS for people who traveled to Iran. They have to apply for the actual visas.

Former NATO Secretary-General Javier Solana was denied an automatic visa waiver to enter the U.S. because of a trip to Iran.

The judges are commenting only on the extent of presidential authority. 

Which is all they exist to do in this case. The decision belongs to the president under his executive powers and he made it.

There are so many more Muslim majority countries that are known to harbour terrorists or likeminded scum that aren't on the list.

Scum? Wasn't aware we were allowed use that term!

The US allies itself with terrorist nations like Israel and Saudi Arabia but arms them and gives them billions in contracts, business and support.

No travel ban there, whatsoever.

Nobody can tell me if the countries I listed in a previous post have had any people committing terrorist acts on US soil.

Whereas the 9/11 plot was cooked up by Saudi Arabians and Egyptians.

Oh and a British man tried to assasinate Trump. That was quickly played down and glossed over. No travel ban there, either.

you don't know if they would send a Jihadist disguised as a refugee, 

Wait a minute. I thought SCOTUS just ruled that Trump's ban did not target any particular religious group, but now that's exactly what you're doing.

Keep your story straight. According to the SCOTUS majority, this has nothing to do with religion. Just national security.

Give it a few days and Trump is going to be blabbing about his Muslim ban again.

Well it is an issue for those families who experienced the attacks and suffered loss. vetting a country which provided most of the 9/11 terrorists.

And yet, they seem to support the President, his temporary ban and that we have to sleep with the devil if we really want to have peace.

The US allies itself with terrorist nations like Israel and Saudi Arabia but arms them and gives them billions in contracts, business and support.

Israel, a terrorist nation? The ONLY democracy in the Mideast, a country swimming in a sea of sharks that want to kill it and they are the terrorists? Lol

No travel ban there, whatsoever.

Yes, weak argument lost.

Nobody can tell me if the countries I listed in a previous post have had any people committing terrorist acts on US soil. 

That’s OK, I understand, the left lost, but the president won and it’s his decision and he’s going to enforce the laws thank God.

Whereas the 9/11 plot was cooked up by Saudi Arabians and Egyptians. 

Yes and they also help us in the battle against radical jihadism.

Oh and a British man tried to assasinate Trump. That was quickly played down and glossed over. No travel ban there, either.

Where is he now? Lol

It would be impossible to know how many families from the 9/11 terrorist attacks would support Trump.

Yes, impossible, but it’s going through, so for it or against it, it’s a temporary ban.

Not all those killed were America. 83 victims were Brits and there were other nations too like Japanese.

Ok, but I’m an American and I worry about “my”country.

Yes and they also help us in the battle against radical jihadism.

What is “radical jihadism”? Is there moderate Jihadism or reformed Jihadism?

Part of the reason why Trump could get away with his boneheaded rants is many of his supporters were as ill-informed as he was.

What is “radical jihadism”? Is there moderate Jihadism or reformed Jihadism? 

19 Hijackers on 2 jets slamming into two giant buildings with 4,000 people working in them would be considered kinda......oh, a radical jihadist attack.

Part of the reason why Trump could get away with his boneheaded rants is many of his supporters were as ill-informed as he was

No, it was the opposite, all the Liberals were so he’ll informed, that they thought that by ranting and raving and using pure emotion would deny him his much needed travel ban.

Well my family is American too. My brother is a survivor from the World Trade Center so yes I would have like to have seen Saudi on the list of banned countries.

Sorry to hear that, but that’s not going to happen. For better or worse, they are our allies and very instrumental in helping us fight this war on terror.

Time to scrap the SCOTUS right-wing reality show, ain't nothing but an insult to the democratic ideals of the republic. The justices, gerrymandered by POTUS for party political purposes, emphatically do not serve the interests of 97% of the American people. The historical record will show that a biased SCOTUS even had the effrontery to steal the presidential election handing it on a plate to the undeserving "shrub". The shenanigans of SCOTUS can only become more brazen until a future progressive president backed by a national reform movement puts an end to the gerrymandering that flouts standards of decency and poses a flagrant affront to the reputation and honor of the country's "justice" system. This latest SCOTUS ruling is a blow to democratic values and is certain to rebound one day to bite Amerikan bigots on their rear ends .

This Muslim ban includes Argentina but not Saudi Arabia. I feel safer already.

This will be rectified when Democrat Maxine Waters becomes president!

Run, Maxine, run! Waters in 2020!

What is “radical jihadism”? Is there moderate Jihadism or reformed Jihadism? 

19 Hijackers on 2 jets slamming into two giant buildings with 4,000 people working in them would be considered kinda......oh, a radical jihadist attack.

No, a jihadist attack. Jihadists are radicals by definition. If you wrote a piece in the Washington Post about the problems with ‘radical Jihadism’, you’d be corrected in an instant.

This is not a pedantic point. Too many people do not talk with accuracy about this problem. I understand it takes a little reading but it is worth it.

What do you think of the fact that many of the jihadists behind 9/11 were Saudis?

No, a jihadist attack. Jihadists are radicals by definition. If you wrote a piece in the Washington Post about the problems with ‘radical Jihadism’, you’d be corrected in an instant. 

Actually, I would not.

This is not a pedantic point. Too many people do not talk with accuracy about this problem.

Talk to your fellow liberal friends, I urge you.

I understand it takes a little reading but it is worth it. *

But the left doesn’t like to read, can’t shout and read at the same time.

What do you think of the fact that many of the jihadists behind 9/11 were Saudis?

Go and scroll up, I gave that answer already

Time to scrap the SCOTUS right-wing reality show, ain't nothing but an insult to the democratic ideals of the republic.

I think the SC finally brought back so,e much needed sanity back and finally overturned a ridiculous ban by some Judge, a high school friend of Obama which is ludicrous to even have a stupid judge in Hawaii trying to override the POTUS just because they injected and emotional discontent feeling into the argument.

The justices, gerrymandered by POTUS for party political purposes, emphatically do not serve the interests of 97% of the American people.

Really? Hmmmmmm.........

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/16/us/politics/the-two-americas-of-2016.html

I doubt that very much.

The historical record will show that a biased SCOTUS even had the effrontery to steal the presidential election handing it on a plate to the undeserving "shrub".

So what you’re trying to say is, the definition of the law itself is not as important as what Trump tweeted?

The shenanigans of SCOTUS can only become more brazen until a future progressive president backed by a national reform movement puts an end to the gerrymandering that flouts standards of decency and poses a flagrant affront to the reputation and honor of the country's "justice" system.

ROFL!!! Too funny. The last progressive President didn’t do that well and now you want to go further left?? Oh, I pray that you guys do, please get the most radical leftist you can find.

This latest SCOTUS ruling is a blow to democratic values and is certain to rebound one day to bite Amerikan bigots on their rear ends .

Yeah, with any luck, but libs don’t believe in that. Lol

By the way, there might be one or two more SC justices retiring. I see a rainbow. Great day.

Conservatives just won the labor union dues case too. Those 2 old judges might as well retire so we can stop having 5-4 decisions and start getting some 7-2.

Signs: "NO MUSLIM BAN"

It's not.

Crazy: "A racist and immoral President,"

Wrong.

Trump Wins on His Travel Ban in SCOTUS Ruling

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSuUlhcsf2A

Black, the midterms will decide if you get another SC judge if one retires. If the Dems take the Senate, they will enact the McConnell Rule which states only the next president can decide the next justice, meaning any Trump appointees will be ignored.

Very true @superlib and that is justified if they do. I just don’t get why every single decision about what the law says ends up 5-4 along political ideological lines.

cant even the Supreme Court just judge based only on what the law says? Well maybe not because other factors besides written law seem to get involved in these decisions.

Black: cant even the Supreme Court just judge based only on what the law says?

It's never that cut and dry, or else we'd have just one judge. People don't even agree if the Constitution is a static or living document.

The McConnell Rule won't be used if the GOP keeps the Senate. It was a made up rule they applied to Obama that they wouldn't apply to Trump.

Thanks Hillary Clinton- Kennedy has retired and another Gorsuch is on the way. I am so grateful that you were such a corrupt, corporatist elitist that you lost a layup election to a reality tv star. It’s an early Christmas!

nishikat - This Muslim ban includes Argentina but not Saudi Arabia. I feel safer already.

Then it wasn't a Muslim ban. "Muslim ban" was just the popular name given to the orders based on the whims of Democrats and their main stream media water carriers.

Then it wasn't a Muslim ban. "Muslim ban" was just the popular name given to the orders based on the whims of Democrats and their main stream media water carriers.

WRONG:

complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on.

(Trump quote)

Trump failed. It was a failed Muslim ban. Just like he failed with his wall and his promise to keep snatching kids. Also, Trump hates Harley Davidson.

Then it wasn't a Muslim ban.

Not much of a ‘Muslim Ban’ if it doesn’t have any impact on over 1 billion of the worlds Muslims. But if you live in a world of spin and narratives all for the purposes of promoting a Leftist ideology, living a life of delusion is a small price to pay.

@SuperLib: People don't even agree if the Constitution is a static or living document.

That’s actually not true. Everyone agrees that the meaning of the US Constitution can change with the times. It’s just that one side believes that change is accomplished through the built-in amendment process and the other through ideology and the magic of divined penumbras.

Not much of a ‘Muslim Ban’

Trump failed! He promised complete shut down. Trump failed at his Muslim ban promise. Just like he is failing at his wall promise. Trump also wants Harley Davidson to go out of business.

*Trump failed! He promised complete shut down. Trump failed at his Muslim ban promise. *

Congratulations! Then I bringing up that ridiculous non-Muslim ban case all the way to the Supreme Court was a humongous waste of time and money after all. Have fun celebrating Trumps Muslim ban failure - I guess...

Congratulations! 

Why congratulate Trump? His complete Muslim ban failed. Saudi Arabia had how many hijackers on 9/11? Venezuela? Yes, that country brought down those twin towers and really deserve to be on the Muslim ban. It's a failure just like his zero tolerance policy for immigration and no Hillary arrest for her crimes (he promised that). Also, no wall. But that is all fine and good since the stock market is up. Still getting rich off my 401K plans. But what's the point of all these financial gains if the US gets blown up due to Trump's failed Muslim ban. As Trump says, Islam hates us. But with his failed Muslim ban they are going to blow us up any minute.