Posted on 07/19/2017 11:11:49 AM PDT by Dave346
I don't doubt the Bushes got just what they wanted with Souter and Roberts, stealth candidates, or Trojan horses. Trump seems to have just shown with Gorsuch that an administration can find a real conservative if that's what they want to find.
Deep State Coup.
Trump’s team did that on purpose having figured out this scotus chief justice likes to split the baby. They gave them an easy split. Real relatives versus organization straphangers.
Trump signaled this Monday, iirc, by beating scotus to the punch and allowing grandparents.
The USSC has stayed the Hawaiian Court order. That means Grandparents etc are NOT allowed in.
I’m always missing the blueberries.
The two brats from Ireland he adopted through Mexico.
My guess is George Bush II (Jeb’s Brother) KNEW this guy was a lib and appointed him deliberately to SCOTUS as a counterbalance to Alitto.
Roberts is a full-fledged flip/flip dong/ding.
The problem with allowing grandparents in is that means you also must allow grandsons......young ISIS fighters could qualify.
So, a grandpa that is past his prime but still hoping to receive his 72 raisins can’t strap on a bomb and kill himself and others?
What part of ‘terrorist’ countries does our lawmakers not understand . . . especially when it portends to “enemies foreign and domestic” . . .
Looking more and more like they may be the “domestic” part of the above.
The other part deals with who is a refugee with a bona fide relationship with a US entity. SCOTUS didn't rule on that. It sent that part back so the 9th Circuit can deal with it. Meanwhile, the district court's interpretation of "bona fide" is stayed. The issue of bona fide relationship will be back before SCOTUS no matter who loses in the 9th Circuit. The 9th Circuit now has motivation to act quickly, adopting the Hawaii court's interpretation of bona fide relationship (for refugees).
No. You have that reversed. The government moved to have the grandparent rule stayed. SCOTUS denied the government's motion.
And "cousins" too, which I think is a huge mistake. You let in one Somalian and you have to let in all 17,000 of his "cousins".
The fine print of Trump’s allowance said “of US citizens”.
I’m betting that’s what he’ll enforce.
A US citizen will have passed rigorous vetting.
Thanks, very confusing when dealing with double negatives and two separate issues. I assume the grandparent issue can come back to SC after 9th appeal ruling?
Unintended consequences that liberals are so good at:
So, if I’m a government official and I know that letting in one person means I am letting in an extended family, wouldn’t it be safe to say that I will be more likely to say no especially if I have doubts about the extended family? Won’t my inquiries by necessity be expanded to cover more information about the person’s relationships? And if so, wouldn’t we be letting in fewer people?
I know, but still "cousin" can be pretty broad... unless it states "first cousin" or something.
I have 8 first cousins.... and god only knows how many "second" cousins and "cousins once removed".... must be many hundreds. And, I certainly couldn't vouch for many of them... never even met half of them.
President Trump deserved better from “Republicans” on the court, but what should one expect from RINO Kennedy and fake conservative Roberts, who legalized Obamacare as a “tax”.
The Republican Establishment RINO’s are enemies of the President of the United States for sure, but enemies of “We the People of the United States” even more with their determination to flood the country with security risks for the sake of cheap labor.
The grandparent issue is settled under the temporary restraining order issued by SCOTUS in late June, as intepreted by the federal district court in Hawaii. That's a done deal.
Everything remains open "on the merits," to be argued whenver SCOTUS decides to get around to it, and they may decide to delay until the EO runs out, then declare the issue moot.
The back and forth before the case is decided on the merits involves preliminary injunction. SCOTUS has conclusivley asserted that the president may not exclude grandparents without a specific reason, at least until the case is decided.
To me, that is a bad sign. Generally speaking, courts interfere LESS on a preliminary basis, than they are willing to do on the merits. SCOTUS is supporting the Hawaii district court as it walks all over the administration's orders.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.