Message Board Archives

Judge in Hawaii blocked it.

In reply to black

Yep - frustrate his ass

In reply to black

Don't violate the Constitution

That said he has bigger worries right now - ask Roger Stone

Link Text
Indian American lead lawyer on case Neal Katyal

In reply to Runs

Saw him on Rachel's show.

In reply to black

In reply to SnoopDog

Without the constitution this land woulda been in mass chaos possibly civil war

In reply to Runs

Even with a constitution, they had a civil war, Jim crow, segregation etc etc

ANything is possible.....constitution or not

In reply to ray

True, one just have to hope for saner minds to prevail

Federal Judge in Greenbelt, Maryland just blocked it too. "Intent" is a mutha. Both this judge and the one in Hawaii mention Trumps promises to impose a Muslim ban.

TV legal pundits are saying that Judges should only rule on EO itself and not on campaign promises or other sayings. Feels SC will overturn.

Link Text
Gaslighting psychology

When looking at the Constitutionality of laws, courts ALWAYS look at the intent of the law. For example, when there is a law that was legislated in Congress, courts look at the "Legislative History" of the law. That is common legal practice. For the Executive Order, the "Legislative History" is really all that hateful $hit that Trump was saying before and after he got elected.

They do rule on the EO itself, but it is typically more complicated that merely looking at the Text.


Courts also look at the "effect" of the law. For example, in cases involving discrimination, they look at whether the law is "Discriminatory on its face," which ask the question about the language of the law itself. The people who draft discriminatory laws are usually smart enough to keep the language neutral, so most discriminatory laws are NOT discriminatory on its face. Courts then look to see if the law is "Discriminatory in EFFECT." That looks beyond the language of the law, goes into who gets affected, who is excluded, included etc. Same here.

In reply to Trinidave

Cool, great explanation

In reply to Trinidave

Well said.

The real backlash is soon to come when this hits the airline industry.

In reply to Trinidave

Those liberal pussy courts with their big fancy book learning words like "effect", "discriminatory", and "laws".

Don't they realize President Bannon wants to deconstruct the administrative state and make Fascism great again? What the hell is wrong with these people!?!?

In reply to SnoopDog

In reply to Trinidave

Even Ronald "the Hamburglar" McDonald has had enough of the PussyGrabber-in-Chief.

In reply to SnoopDog

They deleted the tweet. Maaaaaaaaaaan. They should have kept that badboy up there.

In reply to Trinidave

The internet never forgets Bro.