Supreme Court Upholds Trump Travel Ban

[rocketman987]

What I don't understand how can NINE smart experts in their field look at he facts OBJECTIVELY..and differ so widely?

I'd understand maybe 7-2, or 8-1, or 6-3 in really complicated gray areas.

Are they hopelessly BIASED ideologically , or the issue, the law, the Constitution this arcane??

 

[Tsing Tao]

For all the constitutionalist chest tumping your side does, they sure are ok with going against the Constitution.

What is against the Constitution?

 

[Slartibartfast]

Supreme Court Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg delivered a scathing dissent to the court upholding President Donald Trump’s travel ban Tuesday, saying “a reasonable observer would conclude that the Proclamation was motivated by anti-Muslim animus.”

“The majority holds otherwise by ignoring the facts, misconstruing our legal precedent, and turning a blind eye to the pain and suffering the Proclamation inflicts upon countless families and individuals, many of whom are United States citizens,” Sotomayor wrote in the dissenting opinion, which Ginsburg joined.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/sonia-sotomayor-scotus-decision-trump-muslim-travel-ban-2018-6

Justice Sonia Sotomayor slammed the Supreme Court's decision to uphold President Donald Trump's travel ban in an impassioned dissenting opinion that contended the ruling failed to "safeguard" the principle of religious neutrality embedded in the First Amendment.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday voted 5-4 to uphold the controversial travel ban, which primarily targets majority-Muslim countries.

 

[Arnie]

You're right about that, but refusing to let Obama appoint a Supreme Court justice on the way out the door is about the least we expect of our leaders.

After all, it was Uncle Joe's idea.

 

[Cuddles]

What is against the Constitution?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appointments_Clause

It's one thing to shoot down a nominee in a vote, it's a whole different thing altogether to skirt the vote using made up precedent to even have a hearing, knowing full well the vote may not go your way.

 

[Arnie]

Supreme Court Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg delivered a scathing dissent to the court upholding President Donald Trump’s travel ban Tuesday, saying “a reasonable observer would conclude that the Proclamation was motivated by anti-Muslim animus.”

“The majority holds otherwise by ignoring the facts, misconstruing our legal precedent, and turning a blind eye to the pain and suffering the Proclamation inflicts upon countless families and individuals, many of whom are United States citizens,” Sotomayor wrote in the dissenting opinion, which Ginsburg joined.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/sonia-sotomayor-scotus-decision-trump-muslim-travel-ban-2018-6

Justice Sonia Sotomayor slammed the Supreme Court's decision to uphold President Donald Trump's travel ban in an impassioned dissenting opinion that contended the ruling failed to "safeguard" the principle of religious neutrality embedded in the First Amendment.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday voted 5-4 to uphold the controversial travel ban, which primarily targets majority-Muslim countries.

How can she argue that when the ban does not ban muslim's? Seems she is the one ignoring facts. They are more muslim majority countries NOT on the ban than on it.

 

[Slartibartfast]

How can she argue that when the ban does not ban muslim's? Seems she is the one ignoring facts. They are more muslim majority countries NOT on the ban than on it.

Maybe now, I have not counted. However it is clear that Trump instigated this to stir hate of Muslims, as he did with Mexicans because he whole stick at the time needed someone to hate. Hitler-Jews bla bla bla, that was his playbook, give the people a common enemy to unite against. It was not about facts with him, he knew he could get a greater emotional reaction this way.

Afterwards.. he edits and tries to make it about not being a religious/culture war as he runs against the constitution. She is noting fruit of poisoned tree.

The law factors intent.

 

[Poindexter]

Maybe now, I have not counted. However it is clear that Trump instigated this to stir hate of Muslims, as he did with Mexicans because he whole stick at the time needed someone to hate.

It's shtick (or schtick) you illiterate, as in your phony trading shtick.

 

[Slartibartfast]

It's shtick (or schtick) you illiterate, as in your phony trading shtick.

View attachment 187744

Any trader who trades knows that was calling the incredibly obvious high See how much was a short? You are only embarrassing yourself with that. Good trading by Slartibartfast though. Remember I taught you how the system can split up multiple contracts making it seem like a lot more trades happened?

So you are NOT offended for your black sister who was called a monkey/animal?

You do have a black sister right? That was not a lie?

So getting back to Ivanka and Kushner's wedding blessing rabbi (chief Sephardi rabbi of Israel) saying your black sister is a monkey, an animal.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/chief-rabbi-compares-african-americans-to-monkeys/

How does that make you feel?

 

[Slartibartfast]

More silence or diversion? I have asked you three times today.

Edited.. seems he is having some kind of mental short circuit... I can wait.

Edited again.. Some time later, he has not replied.. sorry about the shtick typo, got all day jackhammers at the construction site nearby. Head pounding a bit.