All of what follows pertains to media reporting on the eve of Feb. 3rd, 2017.
A Federal Republican Judge (FRJ), appointed by POTUS Geo. W. Bush, issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) *freezing* the current “Travel Ban” issued by POTUS-DT, to be effective immediately, in all 50 states. The FRJ said the suit is “likely to prevail.” The suit alleges many violations of the U.S. Constitution (USC). The AG for Washington State (WS) says this is not about politics, it’s about upholding the law. Travel is now as ‘free’ as it was prior to the Executive Order (EO). The FRJ held that WS had “standing.” The 9th FEDERAL Circuit Court (9th) would handle expected appeals.
Acting POTUS AG Sally Yates was fired the other day for refusing to obey the EO. She, also, felt the order violated the USC.
What the FRJ did is not without precedent. In Texas a Federal judge blocked an EO by POTUS-BO. This happened to POTUS-BO several times during his eight years. The contested issue is likely to go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court (USSC).
Sidebar: there is so much NEWS right now that *all* of it is not getting reported — too much news! Is this by design, so the public is unaware of certain things they should be advised about?
Critics are saying many will avoid travel to CONUS, which will hurt business everywhere, here and abroad. Blue and Red seem to be at “civil war” (functionally speaking).
POTUS-DT hung a picture of POTUS-Andrew Jackson in his office. What did A.J. stand for — what is he known for? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Jackson and here’s another link:
One pundit: POTUS does not have his whole team put together at this point; when that’s the case you have to be ‘more thoughtful’ (not less so).
The FRJ did not say which of the presented arguments were the strongest. This kind of order is extraordinary and not easy to obtain. The burden of proof is high. This same AG sued POTUS-BO twice. This AG says it doesn’t matter to him who the POTUS is, it’s about upholding the USC. The AG says the legal team from the WH represented their side very expertly but the judge agreed with the AG.
There have been other federal lawsuits and not all federal judges are in agreement, conflicting decisions have been issued. We need a uniform national policy.
It is unclear as to whether or not VISAs are being reinstated. Like the weather, things could change quickly. The actions by WS may embolden other states to do likewise, issuing similar orders. The limit of DT’s power is being explored as his various actions are being challenged in and out of court (many demonstrations happening all over).
Steven Bannon and Steve Miller are influential in shaping DT’s policy vision. They see this time as ‘the’ time to make the most impact, right at the onset.
The USSC is not fully staffed. What if they hear the case and it’s tied, 4-4? Well, the lower court decision would prevail, but if the lower court decisions are conflicted, it could be a huge mess impossible to fix until there are 9 on the bench at the USSC. There aren’t nine b/c the GOP legally blocked the person nominated to fill the seat by POTUS-BO.
The 9th Circuit Court is very divided — ultimate outcome there would depend on ‘who’ (which 3-judge panel) ended up hearing the case, and whether or not they support DT.
Experts are saying that there’s no need to vet an entire group of people, that ‘individual’ vetting would serve quite well, without increasing any risk to the people of the USA.
Is POTUS-DT a ‘role model’ for many in the USA? What is he modeling that is exemplary? Much of his behavior is self-defeating, with himself stepping on some of his (potentially) best moments.
Many states feel that for POTUS-DT to say that they must fall in line with all of his policies or be at risk of losing federal funding is a form of ‘highjacking’ and ‘bullying’ etc.
The Federal Gov. has a long history of destroying evidence when it suits them — if they think they might lose.
A ‘religious test’ cannot be part of how you are allowed (or not allowed) into the USA b/c it violates the USC.
The governor of WS supports the actions of his AG and Federal Judge. The ‘state’ has standing and is the plaintiff in the suit.
The WH DOJ plans to file an emergency stay.
The magnitude of self-congratulatory rhetoric coming from DT is unprecedented and many find off-putting and un-Presidential. He’s carried his campaign trail bluster into the WH. He seems to operate on alt. facts and inside the ‘bubble’ of his own reality, he can do no wrong (in his eyes and the eyes of his base).
No one has ever seen this many leaks coming from a WH this early in a POTUS term. Will these leaks eventually cause the whole ‘dam’ to burst? Some report there’s a “Lord of the Flies”-like atmosphere behind closed doors at the WH.
Polls were proven accurate (after the fact) with respect to the election outcomes — with the polls accurately predicting what ended up happening. These same polls are reporting historically low rating for POTUS-DT, which are always as high as they are going to be right now, at this early time in office . . . likely to go ‘down’ from here.
DT calling the Federal Judge who issued the order a “so-called” judge. This judge was vetted by the Senate and has a lifetime appointment.
His base is saying they voted for DT’s gruff manner — they want it.
17,000 students are affected by the ‘Ban.’ 12,000 of these students are from Iran. These foreign students end of being American ‘ambassadors’ (by reporting their pos. or neg. experience with America and Americans). We need students from all over the world (most say). Vandy law prof. Carol Swain disagrees with the Federal order and sides with DT, saying she believes the EO does ‘not’ violate the USC.
MEDIA today seems include all kinds of OPINION, EDITORIAL-TYPE sites that are totally close-minded to the views of the ‘other side.’ Is this helpful? How can it be.
The Super Bowl is on Feb. 5 and is being politicized b/c DT plans to be there and is friends with QB Brady and the coach, etc. and has aspired to own an NFL team in the past . . . some say if he ‘did’ get to own a team he would not have tried to be POTUS. Lady GaGa is to be the halftime feature and she is anti-Trump and most likely to spout off.
If the Johnson Amendment is trashed then churches can become ‘political action committees’. Church and state are to be separate. The state is not to endorse any particular religion. If DT has his way, many financial loopholes can evolve and churches used as a way to ‘launder’ money. Advocates say, “Why can’t pastors speak freely like they could prior to the Johnson Amendment?” Advocates say it’s Biblical . . . but what about the tax break . . . if the Johnson Amendment is repealed, should the tax-break be given to them even though they have become ‘political’ (instead of just merely religious)?