Federal 9th Circuit Appeals Court continues the suspension of Trump No Enter ban…

The Court maintains the stay of the Federal Government’s ban of people from seven Middle Eastern and African countries that are Muslim majority countries…

The court threw Trump’s own words back at him…. that the ban IS A ‘Muslim Ban’…

It probably did NOT help that President Trump dissed the judges…

President Trump and his guys Bannon and Miller just had a door slammed in their faces….

We are sure to have a reaction on twitter from Trump….

The vote was 3 to 0 against Trump….

A three-judge federal appeals panel on Thursday unanimously refused to reinstate President Trump’s targeted travel ban, delivering the latest and most stinging judicial rebuke to his effort to make good on a campaign promise and tighten the standards for entry into the United States.

The ruling was the first from an appeals court on the travel ban, and it was focused on the narrow question of whether it should be blocked while courts consider its lawfulness. The decision is likely to be quickly appealed to the United States Supreme Court.

That court remains short-handed and could deadlock. A 4-to-4 tie in the Supreme Court would leave the appeals court’s ruling in place….


Federal immigration law undeniably gives the president broad authority to bar people from coming into the U.S., stating that if the president finds “the entry of any aliens” would be “detrimental” to the country’s interests, he can impose restrictions. But lawsuits across the country have alleged that Trump’s particular order ran afoul of the Constitution in that it intentionally disfavored Muslims.

Flentje did offer the judges a fallback option: they could, he said, limit Robart’s order so that it only applied to foreigners previously admitted to the country who were abroad now or those who wished to travel and return to the United States in the future. Purcell said the government had not demonstrated how they could practically implement such a solution.

Trump and his supporters have pressed the case that the short-term stoppage on refugees and immigrants from Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen is necessary for national security reasons. Trump went so far as to suggest on Twitter that if an attack were to happen, the judiciary were to blame. On Wednesday, he denounced arguments about his order as “disgraceful” and said “a bad high school student” would understand the broad authority the law gives him to impose immigration restrictions.

A day earlier, Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly told Congress he thought judges might be considering the issue from an “academic” perspective instead of the national security lens through which he views the world.

“Of course, in their courtrooms, they’re protected by people like me,” Kelly said.

Federal courts in New York, California and elsewhere already had blocked aspects of the ban from being implemented, although one federal judge in Massachusetts declared that he did not think that challengers had demonstrated that they had a high likelihood of success. The case before the 9th Circuit, though, was much broader than the others, because it stemmed from a federal judge’s outright halting of the ban. It was decided by Friedland, Clifton, and Judge William C. Canby Jr., who was appointed by President Jimmy Carter….



President Trump is up ALREADY on twitter….

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump

The Full Appeals Court decision Here


Justice Roberts,  who issued the tempory injunction, STILL has a hearing on actually making the injuction permenate….

U.S. District Judge James L. Robart had granted the states of Washington and Minnesota only a temporary restraining order on the ban, and the parties are set to file briefs on the East Coast arguing for a more permanent, preliminary injunction through next Saturday. The appeals court judges noted their ruling was a “preliminary one,” and they were deciding only whether the government had “made a strong showing of its likely success” in getting the restraining order thrown out.

The ruling, though, is critically important — as Trump’s ban on refugees lasts only 120 days, and his ban on those from Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen lasts only 90 days. The judges also said that while the states of Washington and Minnesota had made serious allegations, the government had not pointed to any substantive evidence to support its need for the ban….

“The Government has pointed to no evidence that any alien from any of the countries named in the Order has perpetrated a terrorist attack in the United States,” the judges wrote. “Rather than present evidence to explain the need for the Executive Order, the Government has taken the position that we must not review its decision at all.”


27 thoughts on “Federal 9th Circuit Appeals Court continues the suspension of Trump No Enter ban…”

  1. Whoa there “free marketeer.”

    GM is a private company.They can do what they want,right?No need to tie them down with “burdensome regulations” and all that stuff that causes so much heartburn for you Republicans.

    You sound like a bleeding heart liberal here Manila.Trump is driving you over the edge,

  2. I love the hypocrisy on this subject.

    The latest has to do with Mexico.

    GM made a profit this year that was so large the UAW workers received a profit sharing bonus of over $12,000.00.

    The reason for this profit has much to do with the fact Truck production is now in Mexico where wages are mucho less.

    To the best of my knowledge no worker on Mexico had a share of the profit they were responsible for.

    Is that fair?

  3. In fact, China is one of the world leaders in exploring and exploiting all those other alternative sources of energy — hydro, solar, wind, vegetable.

    They believe there’s a connection between carbon concentrations, air quality, health and climate change.

    1. And there are MORE THAN 20 other across the country….

      The ruling form the Appeals court did not only keep the suspension…

      It alos said that the Government’s case was SO WEAK that it was doubtful they could win if pursued…

  4. “Litigated?
    ANOTHER Joke right Manila….

    China IS a Communist Country…

    Nuff Said…”

    I’m thinking. I’m thinking.

    My antithesis is that carbon is not the cause of global warming.

    It’s a byproduct of same.

    As to the executive order, in Boston the stay was lifted. I do not know what Trump can do to change it.

    PS: Free Tibet!

  5. I remember London’s killer fogs of the 1950’s. As I recall, at least in the short run, switching from anthracite to bituminous coal (or maybe it was the other way around), from coal to coke, and from those to natural gas was what initially diminished those smogs (you could barely see more than about one car-length ahead of you.)

    East Germany (the DDR) relied a lot on lignite, which seems to be somewhere between peat and coal, because it could be mined locally, but the atmospheric results were disastrous.

    I’m not sure what’s choking Chinese cities and towns, but I think it’s just the sheer mass of competing, low-tech factories.

    There are few things I admire about China’s new leadership, but they are making a serious effort to improve their environment.

    One roadblock is that the provincial and municipal party leaders often rely heavily on local industry (as well as confiscating private plots for huge luxury building projects), so they often actively try to suppress pesky journalists and local eco-activists trying to bring attention to some local threat to the environment.

    The current Party leadership’s emphasis on old-fashioned Leninist and Stalinist party discipline is two-sided herel: on the one hand, it intimidates dissent and threatens ever increasingly to lead to one-man dictatorship. On the other, it is often quite necessary to root out local power bases that are corrupt and self-seeking.

    However those provincial and local parties (and not the People’s Liberation Army) are the ultimate foundation of the Chinese Communist Party’s monopoly rule.

    1. The Road Block is MONEY…..

      Conservation cost state up MONEY….

      It’s ceratinly cheaper to keep burning stuff until people/the planet is screwed…

      1. Ok…

        The Media is out with ALL sorts of leaks….

        Trump himself hints that his people might issue a new ‘Ban’…

        CNN is reporting that the Trump people will NOT move the case immediately to the Supreme’s


        They are mulling their options and probabaly waiting for Trump to cool down from the loss?…

        1. ….The White House sent conflicting signals Friday about how it would address an appeals court ruling that halted President Donald Trump’s ban on U.S. entry by citizens from seven predominantly Muslim nations, and Trump said he may issue an entirely new immigration order to revise the ban….

          More @ https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-02-10/trump-says-new-action-on-immigration-to-be-issued-next-week?cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_content=business&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social

  6. The Chinese want an excuse not to do anything.

    By simply going to American standards they would have to invest trillions.

    Global Warming theory and Kyoto are the excuse to do nothing.

    And in the meantime keep an competitive advantage.

    And rake in the profits.

    The killer fogs of London in the 50’s ended when the British switched to oil from coal.

    Smog and other air pollutants have been dramatically reduced in the USA.

    Global warming as caused by the use of fossil fuels is still only a thesis.

    The antithesis is that global warming created the industrial revolution.

    And an 8 billion person increase of human population besides.

    Good weather equals good crops.

    Which means more rats, chipmunks, and human beings.

    All of which have had population increases.

    And more CO2.

    If you want immediate action from China whose untreated air pollution is causing respiratory damage today, you ban or tax their products today.

    You will at least inhibit the respiratory damage.

    But stopping global warming?

    I think it is like hitting the waves at the beach to stop the tide from coming in.

    1. The answer is LESS Carbon burning in the atmosphere ….

      More Solar, Wind and even water power

      More efficient motors in everything that burns anything….

      At least those things would slow down the warming…

  7. The best assurance, of course, for China to reduce all those emissions is to build on the rather astonishing agreement of both Obama and China to join the Kyoto/Paris agreement on climate change.

    But nothing would please the energy companies, miners, frackers and drillers supporting Trump and the GOP less than that. (Who’s most likely to deny man-accelerated climate change?)

    Once again let the grandkids pay for current consumption and waste. They’ll be breathing the unlivable atmospheres of Peking, Shanghai, Wuhan and northern China.

  8. Trump issuing an order about China like that?

    It’s conjecture.

    But pollution in China no joke, and getting around American manufacturing regulations by locating there, should be litigated.

    How a country can build two military bases in the South China Sea and do NOTHING about the cesspool it’s become is beyond me.

    As to the no travel order:

    It covers countries where extreme vetting was probably already taking place and not countries where the terrorist would probably come from as a result of the order, which is anywhere else.

    If the purpose of the surprise of this order was to try and catch someone who had been vetted, and for the reason stated above, it’s chances for success were zero.

    As to refugees, and if the purpose of the order was to send the message America should not be taken for granted, let us wait for the first snitch.

    PS: The Reform Party to which Trump once belonged, wanted a 100% moratorium on immigration. It even had it in it’s platform.

  9. NBC is reporting that White House lawyers are now reworking Trumps travel ban order to meet the constitutional objections as I alluded to this morning.

  10. Well, what if Trump could issue an order to ban any import from China or other nation that is flagrantly polluting “the planet” for a period of whatever it takes to at least get to an minimal American standard?

    As the evidence of pollution and harm to the particular populace is undeniable (unlike the travel bans concern for National Security), would that be Constitutional?

  11. This ruling shows how deep the influence of the attitudes of the New World Order has become even in our Judicial system.

    Now is that good or bad?

  12. Actually I think Trump could come up with something that would accomplish much of what he wants to do.

    Alan Dershowitz made the point that Trump should drop the Order he previously issued and come up with one that will pass constitutional muster.

    The fact remains that the Executive does have broad powers in this area.

    The devil of course is in the details.

  13. Well at least one corner of the Republic has recognized the dangers but reduced them due to the far-sighted wisdom of its state legislators.

    You may remember a time when white nationalists dreamt of a White Christian American Redoubt in the sparsely-populated but nearly-100 % Caucasian interior northwest (e.g. Montana, Idaho & Wyoming).

    Now the Montana Legislature has protected her citizens from a far-greater and far-graver challenge: Islamic Sharia Law shall not oppress Montanans.

    No stonings or amputations.

    No executions of apostates.

    Some might ask what alternate universe now governs the Big Sky Country and the Inland Empire, on the other side of the Continental Divide, but they’re just brainwashed by Fake News.

  14. I suppose that the President is still immersed in deeper study of the Constitution.

    But I’ve concluded that he still hasn’t got past Article II (President) and Article I (Congress).

    Article III (Judicial), that arcane clause about religious test at the end of Article VI * and first Ten Amendments (alias the Bill of Rights) still await further study, certainly not the first two clauses of the First Amendment **.

    And give the poor guy a break, he just started this job 20 days ago and has no (civil or military) government experience. You can’t expect a new hire to master all the finer details of a two-century-old Employment Manual in his first month on the job.

    Do you know of someone who might lend his own copy to the newbie ?

    * “ .. no religious Test shall ever be required as Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”

    ** “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of Religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; …. ”

  15. There have been FOUR JUDGES THAT HAVE RULED AGAINST THE Trump Muslim Ban….

    Two Democrats
    Two Republicans

    The summary from ALL of the Judges is the President CANNOT just do WHATEVER he wants w

    1. …twitter….

      Jared Rizzi Retweeted
      Mark Wright ‏@MarkWrightKING5
      Mark Wright Retweeted Donald J. Trump
      WA AG Bob Ferguson just responded, “We’ve seen him in court twice, and we’re two for two… they still have to follow the constitution.”

Comments are closed.