|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
26th April 2017, 07:56 AM | #41 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,929
|
Yes. It was a point argued by both sides and ruled on by the judge:
Quote:
|
26th April 2017, 08:03 AM | #42 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
Oh, no. I don't think you believe this. But that's what you'd get if US conservatives had their way. The GOP is just too far to the right.
Quote:
Quote:
In fact, moderates like me are the best thing that could happen to business owners like yourself. I mean, middle-class union workers like yourself. I mean... well, I can't keep track of your claims anymore. |
26th April 2017, 08:05 AM | #43 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,837
|
|
26th April 2017, 08:08 AM | #44 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,789
|
|
26th April 2017, 08:22 AM | #45 |
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 14,588
|
Oh bloody hell!
For some weird reason Trump keeps thinking that threatening to take judges to court will terribly intimidate them in the same way that Trump terribly intimidated other people when he took them to court. I still do not think that Trump has realized that since federal judges are already in court day in and day out for the last several years, then taking these judges to court when the judges have the law on their side, will not actually intimidate these judges. |
__________________
A man's best friend is his dogma. |
|
26th April 2017, 08:30 AM | #46 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,929
|
Bob, you can google the transcripts and briefs and read them. The Complain from San Francisco is based on the notion that the Executive order is Unconstitutional in large part because it contradicts specific funding clauses approved by Congress:
https://docs.justia.com/cases/federa...00485/307351/1 Line 60 states it pretty clearly. Why is this such a concern that you need to focus on it, but not enough of a concern to read the court documents? That ruling is not something a Circuit court would land on sua sponte and it's one of the more obvious issues with the Executive Order. |
26th April 2017, 08:53 AM | #47 |
Troublesome Passenger
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 21,844
|
Quote:
|
__________________
Like as the waves make towards the pebbled shore, So do our minutes hasten to their end . . . WS |
|
26th April 2017, 09:04 AM | #48 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: As far away from casebro as possible.
Posts: 7,070
|
Duh Towelheadland.
Obviously. |
__________________
There is no secret ingredient - Kung Fu Panda |
|
26th April 2017, 09:08 AM | #49 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Port Townsend, Washington
Posts: 39,057
|
|
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant. |
|
26th April 2017, 09:30 AM | #50 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,789
|
|
26th April 2017, 01:15 PM | #51 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,145
|
|
26th April 2017, 01:19 PM | #52 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,929
|
|
26th April 2017, 01:23 PM | #53 |
Troublesome Passenger
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 21,844
|
|
__________________
Like as the waves make towards the pebbled shore, So do our minutes hasten to their end . . . WS |
|
26th April 2017, 02:44 PM | #54 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 7,706
|
Quote:
Actually it does the exact opposite because it shows that the American judiciary is capable of constraining the authority of this pathetic faux strongman and his actions through perfectly legal means, even if it's only temporarily. If the judges were unable or simply unwilling to hold the President to account, and make sure they don't act in contravention of laws and regulations, that would signal a weak rule of law. Other liberal democratic countries might be able to elected governments that are more powerful and suffer far less judicial scrutiny, including a very weak or non-existent forms of judicial review, but it's quite clear that Americans are intellectually and culturally not fit for such forms of government and it's only reasonable for their judges to save them from themselves. |
__________________
We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr And no, Cuba is not a brutal and corrupt dictatorship, and it's definitely less so than Sweden. - dann |
|
26th April 2017, 04:54 PM | #55 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,145
|
|
26th April 2017, 04:55 PM | #56 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,145
|
|
26th April 2017, 04:57 PM | #57 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,145
|
|
26th April 2017, 05:01 PM | #58 |
Nasty Woman
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 96,386
|
|
26th April 2017, 05:07 PM | #59 |
Troublesome Passenger
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 21,844
|
|
__________________
Like as the waves make towards the pebbled shore, So do our minutes hasten to their end . . . WS |
|
26th April 2017, 05:24 PM | #60 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
|
26th April 2017, 05:54 PM | #61 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
|
|
__________________
It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871) |
|
26th April 2017, 06:26 PM | #62 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,145
|
|
26th April 2017, 06:28 PM | #63 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,145
|
|
26th April 2017, 06:29 PM | #64 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,145
|
|
26th April 2017, 06:36 PM | #65 |
Troublesome Passenger
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 21,844
|
|
__________________
Like as the waves make towards the pebbled shore, So do our minutes hasten to their end . . . WS |
|
26th April 2017, 06:46 PM | #66 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,145
|
|
26th April 2017, 06:53 PM | #67 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,929
|
|
26th April 2017, 06:55 PM | #68 |
Troublesome Passenger
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 21,844
|
|
__________________
Like as the waves make towards the pebbled shore, So do our minutes hasten to their end . . . WS |
|
26th April 2017, 06:58 PM | #69 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
|
26th April 2017, 06:58 PM | #70 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 2,530
|
Logger,
When a judge rules against an Executive Order and the Administration has no other recourse but to abide and grumble (and look to appealing to a higher Court), might that not be a sign that the injunction is indeed legal, and not overreach on the part of the judge? If that judge was indeed overstepping his authority, could he not be simply ignored or censured? |
26th April 2017, 07:00 PM | #71 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,145
|
|
26th April 2017, 07:06 PM | #72 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
|
|
26th April 2017, 07:08 PM | #73 |
Troublesome Passenger
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 21,844
|
No, I was asking you a question.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
Like as the waves make towards the pebbled shore, So do our minutes hasten to their end . . . WS |
|
26th April 2017, 07:12 PM | #74 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,145
|
|
26th April 2017, 07:14 PM | #75 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,145
|
|
26th April 2017, 07:17 PM | #76 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,145
|
|
26th April 2017, 07:19 PM | #77 |
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 29,033
|
There's something I find irritating. I read a couple of articles about the ruling, and neither addressed the law at all. They talked about it in political terms. Trump wants this. Activists want that. This team won. That team lost.
Fine, fine, but.....what is the law? I'm guessing, from content in this thread, that the ruling was based on the idea that Congress passed a law that said, "The federal government will give cities/counties/local entities money" and Trump's executive order attached strings to that, "i.e. We won't give them any money unless they do what we want." If that's the case, then it's pretty clearly unconstitutional, but it would be nice if they actually covered that sort of thing in the articles. |
26th April 2017, 07:21 PM | #78 |
Troublesome Passenger
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 21,844
|
|
__________________
Like as the waves make towards the pebbled shore, So do our minutes hasten to their end . . . WS |
|
26th April 2017, 07:27 PM | #79 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
|
|
26th April 2017, 07:28 PM | #80 |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,145
|
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|