Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

They could not even get the Ninth Circus to go along with this nonsense.

Must have been a mighty weak excuse for a legal argument.

Now just add money...

1 posted on 12/03/2018 8:31:58 AM PST by BeauBo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: BeauBo

Good. At least there is some sanity.

Go, Trump, build the wall.


2 posted on 12/03/2018 8:36:30 AM PST by Innovative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: BeauBo

“Conservation groups, led by the Animal Legal Defense Fund and the Center for Biological Diversity, argued that the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996’s provision giving the Homeland Security secretary nearly limitless authority to waive laws in the name of building border protection infrastructure like walls is unconstitutional.

...The 1996 law and subsequent amendments to it give the Homeland Security secretary the power to waive any law — not just environmental ones — in order to facilitate building border infrastructure like fences and roads.”

The Supreme Court left the power to waive any law to build a border wall intact. Funding is the only obstacle.


3 posted on 12/03/2018 8:46:26 AM PST by BeauBo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: BeauBo

Ok, so get on with the building.


5 posted on 12/03/2018 8:51:44 AM PST by bgill (CDC site, "We don't know. how people are infected with Ebola.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: BeauBo

If greenies were really concerned about environmental impact, they’d be concerned about wind farms chopping up eagles.


7 posted on 12/03/2018 9:03:44 AM PST by Flick Lives
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: BeauBo

“Conservation groups, led by the Animal Legal Defense Fund and the Center for Biological Diversity, argued that the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996’s provision giving the Homeland Security secretary nearly limitless authority to waive laws in the name of building border protection infrastructure like walls is unconstitutional.

...The 1996 law and subsequent amendments to it give the Homeland Security secretary the power to waive any law — not just environmental ones — in order to facilitate building border infrastructure like fences and roads.”

The Supreme Court left the power to waive any law to build a border wall intact. Funding is the only obstacle.


11 posted on 12/03/2018 9:50:42 AM PST by BeauBo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: BeauBo

Well, that cr*p didn’t stick to the wall.

Good.


13 posted on 12/03/2018 9:59:01 AM PST by fwdude (Forget the Catechism, the RCC's real doctrine is what it allows with impunity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: BeauBo
Must have been a mighty weak excuse for a legal argument.

Or just a Judge who followed the law.

For those not paying attention, the pro-Trump, pro-border wall decision was made here in San Diego by Judge Gonzalo Curiel. He was the "Mexican Judge" Trump said couldn't make a fair ruling on the "Trump University" case because he was "Mexican".

Also, the law was passed at the end of Bush 43's term and the left was just fine with it through 8 years of Obama. Only when Trump was elected did they realize "environmentalism" was their best tool to stop/slow the wall. Arizona Democrat Rep Raúl Grijalva was driving this now slapped down lawsuit.

17 posted on 12/03/2018 11:10:24 AM PST by ETCM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: BeauBo

President Trump cannot be re-elected without building the wall. All his enemies know this and have been thwarting his efforts for two years. His task was made more difficult by the midterms, since the pathetic GOP sat on their collective “majority” ass.

Pray for our President to stay strong.


19 posted on 12/03/2018 11:25:55 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer (The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: BeauBo

“without explanation”

LOL!!


20 posted on 12/03/2018 11:26:09 AM PST by Professional
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: BeauBo

Even if all four of the Liberal Justices were sympathetic to the environazis’ arguments, they know none of the other Justices would ever agree and so cert denied.


22 posted on 12/03/2018 12:48:38 PM PST by Repeal 16-17 (Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: BeauBo

Circus.

LOL

That one makes me laugh every time I see it :)


26 posted on 12/03/2018 1:47:42 PM PST by dp0622 (The Left should know if.. Trump is kicked out of office, it is WAR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: BeauBo

Appellate courts routinely reject cases without opinion. But this must have been the list of cases too stupid to even go there.


27 posted on 12/03/2018 3:56:03 PM PST by Eleutheria5 (If you are not prepared to use force to defend civilization, then be prepared to accept barbarism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: BeauBo
Gorsuch and Cavanaugh making their presence known.
31 posted on 12/04/2018 7:40:27 AM PST by ExSoldier ("Terrorists: They hate you yesterday, today, and tomorrow. End it, no more tomorrows for them!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson