Virginia court grants preliminary injunction against immigration ban

[Bethere]

The establishment clause this time!

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://wtvr.com/2017/02/13/virginia-court-grants-preliminary-injunction-against-immigration-ban/&ved=0ahUKEwiTrYbn1Y7SAhXK7oMKHff9CT4QqOcBCDEwBw&usg=AFQjCNGIs2a3II3cEBS2hClec4uHrFR-Hg

A Virginia federal judge has granted Virginia’s motion for a preliminary injunction against President Donald Trump’s immigration ban.
U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema with the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia said the Justice Department had responded to Virginia’s injunction request with “no evidence.”
Brinkema’s order specifically prevents the Justice Department from now enforcing section 3(c) of the President’s executive order — barring foreign nationals from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen from entering the US for 90 days — against Virginia residents or those who work at, or attend, Virginia’s public universities.
The judge declined to issue her injunction on nationwide basis “to avoid any claim that” it is “defective because of overbreadth.”

[HoneyBadger]

Over 85% of the world's Muslims are exempt from the ban. :rollseyes:

This just shows how absolutely batshit crazy the left has gone. They honestly think they can divorce the "Islamic" from Islamic terrorism as if one had nothing to do with the other.

If Washington state and Virginia want to open their doors to all comers from Syria and Iran and other terrorist hotbeds, I say let them. Put ankle monitors on the "immigrants" to make sure they don't leave those states and let them deal with the consequences.

[decedent]

The judge declined to issue her injunction on nationwide basis “to avoid any claim that” it is “defective because of overbreadth.”

Nonetheless, it's a good precedent! Aside from this ban being illegal, there's absolutely no reason for this ban that makes no sense.




If Washington state and Virginia want to open their doors to all comers from Syria and Iran and other terrorist hotbeds, I say let them. Put ankle monitors on the "immigrants" to make sure they don't leave those states and let them deal with the consequences.
Not needed because, according to Team Trump's rhetoric, they'll all blow themselves up.

[Crepitus]

Wait, she can't do that. Trump's policies will not be questioned!

[Bethere]

Nonetheless, it's a good precedent! Aside from this ban being illegal, there's absolutely no reason for this ban that makes no sense.




Not needed because, according to Team Trump's rhetoric, they'll all blow themselves up.

This was an entirely different argument than was being made in Washington state. So much for rewriting the order. They are going to have to fight it out in court.

[Bethere]

Wait, she can't do that. Trump's policies will not be questioned!

He has absolute power!

[AZ Jim]

17239

[Bethere]

17239

Indeed.

[Peter1469]

The court seemed to focus on immigrants who already had legal status in Virginia (therefore the US). At least this judge didn't claim that people never in the US had such rights.

I said from the beginning that those people who have been previously approved should not have been part of the EO. A separate one could have been crafted if necessary.

[AeonPax]

`
`
What bothers me most about this was that Saudi Arabia, arguably the worlds number 1 exporter of terrorism and terrorist funding, was excluded from this. For this, Trump rates a Fail.

[Peter1469]

`
`

What bothers me most about this was that Saudi Arabia, arguably the worlds number 1 exporter of terrorism and terrorist funding, was excluded from this. For this, Trump rates a Fail.

It was an old list. It is made up of 6 nations where ISIL is in an active war with others plus Iran.

[FindersKeepers]

`
`
What bothers me most about this was that Saudi Arabia, arguably the worlds number 1 exporter of terrorism and terrorist funding, was excluded from this. For this, Trump rates a Fail.

Saudi has horrible women's rights as well, and yet the US, under every President, gives them a pass. I'm sick and tired of that. Either we start treating the House of Saud like the blight on humanity that it is or we write them off completely. This is just ridiculous. Trump is following in the false footsteps of those who went before him. It is a fail.

[AeonPax]

Saudi has horrible women's rights as well, and yet the US, under every President, gives them a pass. I'm sick and tired of that. Either we start treating the House of Saud like the blight on humanity that it is or we write them off completely. This is just ridiculous. Trump is following in the false footsteps of those who went before him. It is a fail.
`
I agree with you but the US oil cartels have the final say on that; not congress, not a president.

[Bethere]

Saudi has horrible women's rights as well, and yet the US, under every President, gives them a pass. I'm sick and tired of that. Either we start treating the House of Saud like the blight on humanity that it is or we write them off completely. This is just ridiculous. Trump is following in the false footsteps of those who went before him. It is a fail.

I realize that you are too young to remember, but this is just like the conversation we had in 1977 about iran.

[Bethere]

`
I agree with you but the US oil cartels have the final say on that; not congress, not a president.

True, but also, see post #14.

Carter, a well intentioned staunch Christian, felt our foreign policy should reflect our society's Christian values.

How did that work out?

[Adelaide]

Over 85% of the world's Muslims are exempt from the ban. :rollseyes:

This just shows how absolutely batshit crazy the left has gone. They honestly think they can divorce the "Islamic" from Islamic terrorism as if one had nothing to do with the other.

If Washington state and Virginia want to open their doors to all comers from Syria and Iran and other terrorist hotbeds, I say let them. Put ankle monitors on the "immigrants" to make sure they don't leave those states and let them deal with the consequences.

Too many people see this as a black and white issue. There are different branches of Islam and varying levels of commitment/extremism. Not only that, but many people who are assumed to be Muslim because they come from a majority Muslim-country are actually Christian. Muslim immigrants also tend to fair better in terms of finding jobs and managing to enter the middle class rather than staying in the lower income class. Regardless of that; however, it is pretty silly to generalize about Islam.

[Adelaide]

`
`
What bothers me most about this was that Saudi Arabia, arguably the worlds number 1 exporter of terrorism and terrorist funding, was excluded from this. For this, Trump rates a Fail.

They are technically an ally (Lord knows why - oh wait, oil...) and are probably the most important ally in the middle east after Israel and perhaps tied with Jordan. Jordan may be pulling ahead since they actually deal with regional shit that happens, like ISIS. The Saudis abuse their relationship with the US and sit pretty during conflicts, refusing to take a side or contribute. The Wikileaks revealed they actually do have a "side" but they would never act on it unless directly attacked. That makes them a pretty poor ally but again, they have oil.

[Adelaide]

It was an old list. It is made up of 6 nations where ISIL is in an active war with others plus Iran.

Iran makes little sense. Majority of the immigrants I have known in some shape or form who have come from Iran are actually highly educated and more liberal than if they had come from other nations. Iran's large cities have begun modernization in terms of thought and religion... but, maybe it is retaliation for assisting Syria?

[Bethere]

They are technically an ally (Lord knows why - oh wait, oil...) and are probably the most important ally in the middle east after Israel and perhaps tied with Jordan. Jordan may be pulling ahead since they actually deal with regional $#@! that happens, like ISIS. The Saudis abuse their relationship with the US and sit pretty during conflicts, refusing to take a side or contribute. The Wikileaks revealed they actually do have a "side" but they would never act on it unless directly attacked. That makes them a pretty poor ally but again, they have oil.

Turkey, our fellow nato member and the sixth ranked military in the world, belongs on your list someplace.

[Adelaide]

Saudi has horrible women's rights as well, and yet the US, under every President, gives them a pass. I'm sick and tired of that. Either we start treating the House of Saud like the blight on humanity that it is or we write them off completely. This is just ridiculous. Trump is following in the false footsteps of those who went before him. It is a fail.

To be fair, the Saudis have (very, very slowly) been giving more rights to women. The people may not agree with it. There are numerous members of the royal family, specifically some high-ranking wives, who have been pushing education initiatives as well as civil rights issues. The government/royal family seem on board with modernization to a certain degree but I think the actual people in Saudi Arabia (meaning the men) oppose the tiny steps forward, making it harder to implement anything more extreme than allowing a woman to drive. For the royal family they also have to consider their position and what they will gain or lose if they support certain things. Keeping an absolute monarchy is difficult.

[Adelaide]

Turkey, our fellow nato member and the sixth ranked military in the world, belongs on your list someplace.

Not above Israel, Jordan or Saudi Arabia. They don't have oil, they are a fucking mess politically and they have not been very useful with regional conflicts.

[Bethere]

Not above Israel, Jordan or Saudi Arabia. They don't have oil, they are a $#@!ing mess politically and they have not been very useful with regional conflicts.

Tell that to Russia. They've been strategically critical. They control the bosphorus. They have Russian exposure. They control air space just as they control the water.


Turkey v. Iraq? Turkey could just shut off the water. Or they could flood Iraq and kill millions.

Just an example.

Up until recently, they had been our best example of a middle eastern secular state.

[AeonPax]

True, but also, see post #14 Carter, a well intentioned staunch Christian, felt our foreign policy should reflect our society's Christian values. How did that work out?
`
That is why I'll vote for Tulsi Gabbard in 2020. She's a Buddhist.

[Bethere]

`
That is why I'll vote for Tulsi Gabbard in 2020. She's a Buddhist.

She could be a strong candidate.

[MMC]

It was an old list. It is made up of 6 nations where ISIL is in an active war with others plus Iran.

Well it wasn't that old. BO updated it when he added Libya and Somalia.

[MMC]

Too many people see this as a black and white issue. There are different branches of Islam and varying levels of commitment/extremism. Not only that, but many people who are assumed to be Muslim because they come from a majority Muslim-country are actually Christian. Muslim immigrants also tend to fair better in terms of finding jobs and managing to enter the middle class rather than staying in the lower income class. Regardless of that; however, it is pretty silly to generalize about Islam.

Varying degrees of extremism, huh? Yet there is no difference of Islamic Terrorism whether it comes from the Sunni or the Shia. Its still Islamic Terrorism. It is still related to their belief in Islam.

[MMC]

Saudi has horrible women's rights as well, and yet the US, under every President, gives them a pass. I'm sick and tired of that. Either we start treating the House of Saud like the blight on humanity that it is or we write them off completely. This is just ridiculous. Trump is following in the false footsteps of those who went before him. It is a fail.
Well the Saud should have been added to the list.....so to should have Afghanistan.

[del]

`
`
What bothers me most about this was that Saudi Arabia, arguably the worlds number 1 exporter of terrorism and terrorist funding, was excluded from this. For this, Trump rates a Fail.
he's got business interests there

get your priorities right!

[AeonPax]

he's got business interests there get your priorities right!
`
Profits before country.

[MisterVeritis]

`
What bothers me most about this was that Saudi Arabia, arguably the worlds number 1 exporter of terrorism and terrorist funding, was excluded from this. For this, Trump rates a Fail.
Given this list was created by the Obama Regime would you claim Obama not only failed to add SA but also failed to keep Americans safe?

[MisterVeritis]

The Left is falling all over itself to ensure the steady flow of Islamofascists into our nation. Why do you suppose that is? Is it a continued fondness for Barack Hussein O? Is it true that liberalism is a mental disorder and these people are attempting a murder-suicide? Do we really need to bring in more people to add to our welfare expenses?

[hanger4]

he's got business interests there

get your priorities right!

His priorities were the same as Obama's 'Countries of Concern'.

[AeonPax]

Given this list was created by the Obama Regime would you claim Obama not only failed to add SA but also failed to keep Americans safe?
`
The US is directly responsible for the whole-scale slaughter the house of saud, is inflicting upon innocent Yemeni civilians.

[MisterVeritis]

Given this list was created by the Obama Regime would you claim Obama not only failed to add SA but also failed to keep Americans safe?

`
The US is directly responsible for the whole-scale slaughter the house of saud, is inflicting upon innocent Yemeni civilians.
This is a strange opinion. I would say lie but you know where that leads. Nor does your strange opinion answer my question, the one you quoted.

[AeonPax]

Given this list was created by the Obama Regime would you claim Obama not only failed to add SA but also failed to keep Americans safe?This is a strange opinion. I would say lie but you know where that leads. Nor does your strange opinion answer my question, the one you quoted.
`
Not all things in life are clear cut, nor are all conflicts obvious.

[MisterVeritis]

`
Not all things in life are clear cut, nor are all conflicts obvious.
And yet, you made a clear-cut statement as if it was a fact.

[AeonPax]

And yet, you made a clear-cut statement as if it was a fact.
`
True enough. That is what I believe to be fact.

[nathanbforrest45]

Nonetheless, it's a good precedent! Aside from this ban being illegal, there's absolutely no reason for this ban that makes no sense.




\

Why is the ban illegal when there was a law passed by Congress in the 1950's allowing such a ban? How did Jimma Cawder stop immigration from Iran if it were illegal?

I know exactly what this is all about. Republicans are for it so naturally you have to be against it no matter how much its against the best interest of the United States.

[nathanbforrest45]

I find it rather odd that the left is fundamentally arguing that the United States has no right or authority to determine who may or may not enter the country. No matter what they may claim is their motivation this is the end result of their arguments. Is there any other country in the world that does not control who enters their country? Do goat herders have a fundamental right to come to the United States for any reason?

[Peter1469]

Iran makes little sense. Majority of the immigrants I have known in some shape or form who have come from Iran are actually highly educated and more liberal than if they had come from other nations. Iran's large cities have begun modernization in terms of thought and religion... but, maybe it is retaliation for assisting Syria?

Iranian immigrants to the west tend to come from the well off and educated. And they tend to be secular.

The common perception of Iran is as a Shiite power attempting to consolidate power from the Iranian plateau to the Mediterranean (the Shia crescent). Other than oil politics, that was a main US issue in the Middle East since 1979.

[Peter1469]

Varying degrees of extremism, huh? Yet there is no difference of Islamic Terrorism whether it comes from the Sunni or the Shia. Its still Islamic Terrorism. It is still related to their belief in Islam.


Sunni extremism is very different from Shia extremism.

Sunnis are much more dangerous outside of the Middle East (unless you are Jewish).

[Peter1469]

`
The US is directly responsible for the whole-scale slaughter the house of saud, is inflicting upon innocent Yemeni civilians.
We taught them modern tactics and strategy and they are not concerned with reporters and collateral damage.

[MMC]

Sunni extremism is very different from Shia extremism.

Sunnis are much more dangerous outside of the Middle East (unless you are Jewish).

Still.....both are about Islamic Terrorism.

[decedent]

Why is the ban illegal when there was a law passed by Congress in the 1950's allowing such a ban?


This ban not only targets Muslims, but it even has an exception for Christians. (It's a Muslim ban.)

[Evmetro]

Iran makes little sense. Majority of the immigrants I have known in some shape or form who have come from Iran are actually highly educated and more liberal than if they had come from other nations. Iran's large cities have begun modernization in terms of thought and religion... but, maybe it is retaliation for assisting Syria?

Muslim immigrants in the US are NOT in their natural habitat. I spent a lot of time in various Muslim countries during Desert Storm, and have seen how they are in their natural habitat. Trust me, you don't REALLY want Muslims to develop the US into their natural habitat.

Have you viewed and commented on the thread below?

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/78459-Steve-Gern-on-executive-order

That thread might give you a better perspective of reality.

[hanger4]

This ban not only targets Muslims, but it even has an exception for Christians. (It's a Muslim ban.)
decedent what part of this law don't you understand ??

(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

[decedent]

@decedent (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1267) what part of this law don't you understand ??

(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

"Everyone from these Muslim countries can't come unless they're Christians."


Seems like a Muslim ban to me.

[MisterVeritis]

"Everyone from these Muslim countries can't come unless they're Christians."
Seems like a Muslim ban to me.
Even if it was it would still be lawful and Constitutional.

[Peter1469]

"Everyone from these Muslim countries can't come unless they're Christians."


Seems like a Muslim ban to me.
What about the 90% of Muslims not affected. Should we add them to the ban so that you will then be correct?

[Peter1469]

"Everyone from these Muslim countries can't come unless they're Christians."


Seems like a Muslim ban to me.
Persecuted minorities have always been exceptions to travel restrictions.

[Chris]

`
`
What bothers me most about this was that Saudi Arabia, arguably the worlds number 1 exporter of terrorism and terrorist funding, was excluded from this. For this, Trump rates a Fail.

Saudis have oil.