row_33 Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 So there you have it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 Any link to the full text of the decision? Can't do research right now, and hoping someone might summarize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 1 minute ago, TakeYouToTasker said: Any link to the full text of the decision? Can't do research right now, and hoping someone might summarize. I understand that it was only a "stay" until SCOTUS makes a decision. It was 7-2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 11 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said: Any link to the full text of the decision? Can't do research right now, and hoping someone might summarize. https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/120417zr_4gd5.pdf https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/120417zr1_j4ek.pdf 7-2 ruling with Darth Bader Ginsberg and the Wise Latina dissenting. Kinda suprised Kevin James sided with the Majority 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 Thanks gents. Much appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted December 5, 2017 Author Share Posted December 5, 2017 Always gotta share good news Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westerndecline Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 You know the left is out of control when even left scotus judges disagree lol It was a childish , petulant case from the jump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 Wasn't there supposed to be a 90 day review or something? Anyways, I'm glad it went through. Here's a clip I found funny of a joke Norm MacDonald made on his podcast making a leftist female comedian and his simpleton sidekick show the major flaw in the left's thinking when it comes to Islamic terrorist groups. You have to watch from this point to get the whole context of the joke (which he makes at 31:55). It of course went over both their heads. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westerndecline Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 Lol at being concerned about potential anger at Muslims but not the millions that just died from a dirty bomb. This is cognitive dissonance on level infinity lmao 31:55 10 minutes ago, Doc Brown said: Wasn't there supposed to be a 90 day review or something? Anyways, I'm glad it went through. Here's a clip I found funny of a joke Norm MacDonald made on his podcast making a leftist female comedian and his simpleton sidekick show the major flaw in the left's thinking when it comes to Islamic terrorist groups. You have to watch from this point to get the whole context of the joke (which he makes at 31:55). It of course went over both their heads. That's insane they don't see their own retarded flaw in reasoning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted December 5, 2017 Author Share Posted December 5, 2017 One wit suggested the Dems strike up an Amendment declaring no action is Constitutional for four years after the GOP wins the Presidency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 Supreme Court Allows Full Trump Travel Ban 3.0 And The Left Loses It’s Mind, Again. 31 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted December 5, 2017 Author Share Posted December 5, 2017 they like losing their mind beats raising children, going to work, helping out honestly in the church and local community charities think of all the rants we lost out on by not having the internet until the late 1990s (realistically) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted December 5, 2017 Share Posted December 5, 2017 It should never have been prevented from going into effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted December 5, 2017 Author Share Posted December 5, 2017 14 minutes ago, Nanker said: It should never have been prevented from going into effect. the opposition has the right to peacefully raise dissent on behalf of the view of the minority electoral college side it isn't good when they are just being clowns about it and very disloyal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted December 11, 2017 Share Posted December 11, 2017 RON ROTUNDA ON RECUSAL: Justice Ginsburg has some explaining to do. The Supreme Court allowed President Trump’s travel ban to go into effect this week, overturning a lower court ruling as a federal appeals court considers the issue. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented and did not disqualify herself from that preliminary decision. Two questions emerge: First, why not? And second, will she disqualify herself if the court takes the case? We already know what Ginsburg thinks of the president. She told us more than a year ago that she “can’t imagine what the country would be . . . with Donald Trump as our president.” Facing criticism for her apparent endorsement of Hillary Clinton and her attacks on Trump, Ginsburg doubled down, emphasizing in a CNN interview: “He is a faker.” She then went on “point by point, as if presenting a legal brief,” the CNN analyst said. Her statements are particularly troubling in the context of the travel ban case, in which the crucial issue — at least, according to the lower courts and the plaintiffs — is the personal credibility of Trump and whether he delivered his executive order in good faith — in other words, whether he is faking it. It’s no wonder 58 House Republicans sent Ginsburg a letter calling for her recusal because of her comments before the election. She doesn’t care, because #Resistance. But, once again, efforts to “denormalize” Trump will instead weaken institutions people want to constrain him with. https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/283010/ . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted December 11, 2017 Author Share Posted December 11, 2017 (edited) I never thought I'd see a few people as President either, for reasons good or bad, so that's not a disqualifying sediment... she's a partisan hack and that role holds a lot of SCOTUS seats since Day One. Edited December 11, 2017 by row_33 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts