IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


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.
Tags anti-Islam policies , donald trump , executive orders , immigration issues , lawsuits

Reply
Old 26th April 2017, 07:29 PM   #81
Civet
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,657
Any reason why the Congressional Republicans won't do this now? I haven't looked at poll numbers, but I'd wager it's a pretty popular idea among Republican voters.
Civet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2017, 07:30 PM   #82
logger
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,145
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
You people lose very poorly.
Lol
Now that is hilarious!
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2017, 07:32 PM   #83
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 21,844
Originally Posted by logger View Post
It could only be revealing to a dishonest person.
Now that's too funny. You're a stitch. Go on being . . . simple.
__________________
Like as the waves make towards the pebbled shore,
So do our minutes hasten to their end . . .


WS
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2017, 07:37 PM   #84
logger
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,145
Here's a great article explaining where we're at.

https://www.conservativereview.com/a...ngress-respond
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2017, 07:39 PM   #85
logger
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 11,145
Originally Posted by Resume View Post
Now that's too funny. You're a stitch. Go on being . . . simple.
Go on being dishonest and lying about me. It's what you're about. That simple enough?
logger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2017, 07:43 PM   #86
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 21,844
Originally Posted by logger View Post
Go on being dishonest and lying about me. It's what you're about. That simple enough?
Irony.
__________________
Like as the waves make towards the pebbled shore,
So do our minutes hasten to their end . . .


WS
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2017, 07:45 PM   #87
Meadmaker
Guest
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 29,033
Originally Posted by logger View Post
Here's a great article explaining where we're at.

https://www.conservativereview.com/a...ngress-respond
Ok. Thanks.

What an absolutely awful legal analysis, though. Unfortunately, I don't have time to address it at the moment, but the guy who wrote the article is just plain wrong. And it isn't really much of an analysis at all, given that it took a whole bunch of political stuff to get through before ever getting to the legal part, which was spotty at best.

The core of the problem appears to be (I'll look later to confirm, this is after a quick skim) that the order targets funding that has nothing to do with immigration enforcement. If a President can cut off highway funds because he doesn't like immigration, or any other, policy, he pretty much has dictatorial powers. Trump would probably like that, but it never ends well.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2017, 08:29 PM   #88
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,778
Originally Posted by Spindrift View Post
But the right has all the power now. How can this happen?

An overriding and undying persecution complex.

Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
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?

Isn't this a bit like reading an article about someone being arrested for murder and complaining that it doesn't say anything about laws concerning murder?
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2017, 10:59 PM   #89
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
Originally Posted by logger View Post
You seem to guess a lot.

Does the executive branch have the perogitive on border security?
Well there's your problem. Sanctuary Cities have nothing to do with border security.
__________________

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)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2017, 11:08 PM   #90
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 113,982
Originally Posted by logger View Post
Lol
Says a corrupt liberal activist judge.
Evidence of his corruption?
__________________
If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?” Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2017, 11:16 PM   #91
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 113,982
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
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.
Totally agree. But I find that's the same for much reporting on legal cases. It's like when we hear "we will be appealing the judgement" but no mention what point of law is being appealed. Lots of people seem to think that if you get a judgement you don't like you can have another go at it!

So if the Trump administration is going to appeal this what is the point of law that they believe either hasn't been addressed or addressed incorrectly?
__________________
If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?” Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago

Last edited by Darat; 26th April 2017 at 11:28 PM. Reason: removed the illegals
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th April 2017, 11:26 PM   #92
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 21,203
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Evidence of his corruption?
My guess is that the answer will be "He's a liberal"
__________________

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)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2017, 02:15 AM   #93
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
Originally Posted by logger View Post
They have recourse and are moving forward with that. This judge has thrown out years of precedent and the very same thing liberals have argued to keep the states from protecting their own borders. It will be reversed and quickly.
I notice you didn't answer the question.

As usual.

Originally Posted by logger View Post
Now that is hilarious!
Considering how much virtual ink you spent telling us how much you were winning, yes, you losing so much is very funny.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2017, 02:33 AM   #94
Armitage72
Philosopher
 
Armitage72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 8,185
Trump is talking about breaking up the 9th Circuit Court after the judge dared resist the will of the all-mighty God-Emperor.

Quote:
President Trump is considering breaking up the 9th Circuit Court after a federal district court judge in its jurisdiction blocked his order to withhold funding from "sanctuary cities."

In a Wednesday interview with the Washington Examiner, Trump said "there are many people who want to break up the 9th Circuit. It's outrageous."

Yes, "many people", his most popular source of information.
Armitage72 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2017, 03:07 AM   #95
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
Originally Posted by Armitage72 View Post
Trump is talking about breaking up the 9th Circuit Court after the judge dared resist the will of the all-mighty God-Emperor.




Yes, "many people", his most popular source of information.
I think "many people" is just himself, in the plural.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2017, 04:04 AM   #96
Meadmaker
Guest
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 29,033
Originally Posted by logger View Post
Here's a great article explaining where we're at.

https://www.conservativereview.com/a...ngress-respond
I've had a chance now to take a look at the article, but I've decided not to do a lengthy analysis of it, just because I doubt anyone, including you, is all that interested in it. If I'm wrong about that, I can comment more.

The article, for those who don't want to click the link, is basically a polemic against liberal judges. It doesn't quote from the ruling or even provide a link to it. It makes some vague references to it.

My favorite part was a set of enumerated points about the ruling. After some introductory paragraphs about how important this all is, the author provides this:

Originally Posted by article
A number of observations are in order:

1. Judge Orrick is a liberal Obama donor who previously blocked the release of Planned Parenthood videos.
Fantastic. If anyone is writing a textbook about logical fallacies, then can use this example in their chapter on "poisoning the well". It is rarely as blatant or obvious. It distills the essence of the fallacy to its pure form.

The rest of the analysis is of the same caliber. There are errors of fact, and errors of logic.

The one point that I think could possibly have been correct and worthy of comment would be an argument about whether or not there was a live case of controversy before the court, which would affect standing. On that point, perhaps a case could be made, but the article doesn't bother with any justification or reference to the ruling, but merely asserts that the judge erred, with no defense.


I still cannot say whether I agree with or disagree with the ruling, because I still haven't read the ruling or any description of it with enough content to understand the essence of the ruling. However, from little hints here and there, it seems to me that Trump was trying to say that we weren't going to spend money in the manner that the law, passed by Congress and signed by the President, provides for. He can't do that, so the ruling is probably ok. I can't be sure, because news organizations don't see fit to cover the actual law when describing legal rulings, but that is not all that uncommon.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2017, 04:32 AM   #97
Stacko
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 10,837
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
I still cannot say whether I agree with or disagree with the ruling, because I still haven't read the ruling or any description of it with enough content to understand the essence of the ruling. However, from little hints here and there, it seems to me that Trump was trying to say that we weren't going to spend money in the manner that the law, passed by Congress and signed by the President, provides for. He can't do that, so the ruling is probably ok. I can't be sure, because news organizations don't see fit to cover the actual law when describing legal rulings, but that is not all that uncommon.
Here's Lawfare's analysis.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/case-sum...sanctuary-city
Stacko is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2017, 05:03 AM   #98
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 13,384
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Evidence of his corruption?
I think that for logger, "corrupt" and "liberal" is redundant.

And "liberal" means "does not agree with logger".
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2017, 05:20 AM   #99
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 13,384
Originally Posted by Stacko View Post
Thanks for that!
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2017, 08:50 AM   #100
Meadmaker
Guest
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 29,033
Originally Posted by Stacko View Post
Seems fairly straightforward.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2017, 08:53 AM   #101
TraneWreck
Philosopher
 
TraneWreck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,929
Originally Posted by logger View Post
Here's a great article explaining where we're at.

https://www.conservativereview.com/a...ngress-respond
I'm shocked, SHOCKED, I tell you, that this article, very light on the legal argument, totally ignores that South Dakota v. Dole was a ruling about Congressional authority.

I love how in right wing circles the powers of Congress have now become "Federal Government" powers. Is this what you folks identify as "clever"?
TraneWreck is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2017, 09:20 AM   #102
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 21,398
Originally Posted by TraneWreck View Post
I'm shocked, SHOCKED, I tell you, that this article, very light on the legal argument, totally ignores that South Dakota v. Dole was a ruling about Congressional authority.

I love how in right wing circles the powers of Congress have now become "Federal Government" powers. Is this what you folks identify as "clever"?
Especially considering that, as far as I understand it, the whole point of the ruling was that with the EO, the President unconstitutionally tried to use authority that is reserved for Congress. As illustrated by cases such as SD v Dole.

Basically, it needs to be a law, not just an EO.
__________________
Gunter Haas, the 'leading British expert,' was a graphologist who advised couples, based on their handwriting characteristics, if they were compatible for marriage. I would submit that couples idiotic enough to do this are probably quite suitable for each other. It's nice when stupid people find love. - Ludovic Kennedy
pgwenthold is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th April 2017, 09:26 AM   #103
BobTheCoward
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,789
Originally Posted by TraneWreck View Post
I'm shocked, SHOCKED, I tell you, that this article, very light on the legal argument, totally ignores that South Dakota v. Dole was a ruling about Congressional authority.

I love how in right wing circles the powers of Congress have now become "Federal Government" powers. Is this what you folks identify as "clever"?
Here is a Volokh Conspiracy lawyer (ilya Somin) calling that the order would be overturned for exact reasons the Judge used all the way back in January.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.4e9737f2ac27
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2017, 07:04 PM   #104
Civet
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,657
So now Texas has banned sanctuary cities at the state level. Be interesting to see how this plays out.
Civet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th May 2017, 11:17 AM   #105
Civet
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,657
So now a bunch of people in Texas are suing over the sanctuary city ban. I think that's for the best. Go ahead and fight it out in court so everyone has some idea of what their rights and obligations are.

https://www.texastribune.org/2017/05...nstitutionali/

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nation...508-story.html
Civet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th May 2017, 06:52 AM   #106
fuelair
Banned
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 58,581
The Sanctuary-Cities Executive Order Is Trump’s Next Legal Train Wreck



Hopefully Trumpf will be riding Pence or Putin when it wrecks!!!!!!!!!!! If he isn't holstering for one or the other of them!!!
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th May 2017, 07:04 AM   #107
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
What's the point of being the most powerful person in the world if people won't do what you tell them?
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2017, 10:38 AM   #108
Civet
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,657
Big series of raids today in LA targeting MS-13 leaders. Getting some national news. Joint federal/local operation including LAPD and ICE.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/17/us/ms-...les/index.html
Civet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2017, 10:48 AM   #109
Spindrift
Time Person of the Year, 2006
 
Spindrift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Right here!
Posts: 19,246
Originally Posted by Civet View Post
Big series of raids today in LA targeting MS-13 leaders. Getting some national news. Joint federal/local operation including LAPD and ICE.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/17/us/ms-...les/index.html
Gathering them up and sending them all off to graduate school (the penitentiary). Get tough on crime and no delinquent left behind all rolled into one.
__________________
I've always believed that cluelessness evolved as an adaptation to allow the truly appalling to live with themselves. - G. B. Trudeau
A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. - Kay, Men in Black.
Enjoy every sandwich. - Warren Zevon
Spindrift is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:38 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.