A federal appeals court refused Thursday to reinstate President Donald Trump's ban on travelers from seven predominantly Muslim nations, dealing another legal setback to the new administration's immigration policy. In a unanimous decision , the panel of three judges from the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declined to block a lower-court ruling that suspended the ban and allowed previously barred travelers to enter the U.S.This was reasonably foreseeable. Trump tried to bully the judges by running his mouth. They apparently weren't having any of it.
Lawyers pretty much always advise clients to keep quiet about their cases. With the number of times that Trump and his companies have been in court, one would think that he should have known better.
Apparently not. By the time he finishes running his Twitter-mouth, he'd be lucky to successfully fight a parking ticket.
6 comments:
Unless he wants this ruling. Perhaps then blame the courts on the next attack, and begin an attack on the last piece of the triad he doesn't control.
I wonder if we'll have our "Reichstag Fire" before the summer is out.
I'm sure there will be something that His Fraudulency Donald the Trump tries to treat like a Reichstag Fire. But everybody's pretty much expecting that now, so I dunno how it'll work.
I listened to the hearing. The entire hearing. The government lawyer's argument basically boiled down to "you can't do this, you don't have the authority!". That's as ill-advised as telling a cop he can't arrest you -- next thing that'll happen is that you're flat on your face on the ground with a boot in your back, getting fitted for steel bracelets, and off to spend the night in a holding tank with random drunks, druggies, pimps, and general bad guys before getting bailed the next morning. Uhm, yeah.
Then when that argument failed, he started making a bunch of assertions with no evidence. The judges kept asking, "where is that briefed? I don't see that briefed." and he just hemmed and hawed about how he hadn't yet had time. The judges were *not* impressed at that. He hadn't had time, yet he was wasting *their* time, asking them to consider evidence that wasn't even *evidence* yet? That's *not* how appeals courts work!
My guess is that the government lawyer got ordered to appeal before he had his case presented at the trial court level, and just made up shit on the fly. Either that, or he's so incompetent he shouldn't be allowed to chew gum and walk at the same time, nevermind practice law.
The ninth is pretty liberal, so maybe if he gets another case appealed elsewhere, he might get a different circuit to disagree and thus get it thrown to the supremes... Or wait, can he just ask the supremes to review it because he's the president?
Either way, if they deadlock 4-4 it'll get thrown back to Robart, right?
None of those scenarios seem likely to reinstate the ban really soon.
He seems to have a problem with badmouthing judges these days that I haven't read anything about him having before when he had litigation up to his eyeballs for all of those years. But just because I haven't heard about it doesn't mean he wasn't doing it.
-Doug in Oakland
the cynic in me thinks he knew (or one of his advisors) all along that the ban wouldn't fly legaly-but threw it up anyway. That way when it's struck down he can go back to his supporters and say "see, I tried and got stopped by the opposition. so give me more money for my reelection, next time, for sure."
It seems to me that our Resident has been able to throw his money and influence around to pave his own way, for so long now that he doesn't envision a No.
He was in a 'business' bubble where everyone did his bidding or could be fired for not.
Now for probably the first time in his life, some people 'with robes' are telling him NO. It has never happened to him and it will eventually burn him up inside.
I just hope he doesn't burn the world up too in his frustration.
We are in for such a rough rid
w3ski
Post a Comment