« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: Appeals court upholds nationwide ban against Trump's travel ban

By: Cactus Flower in ALEA | Recommend this post (0)
Fri, 26 May 17 5:18 AM | 54 view(s)
Boardmark this board | The Trust Matrix
Msg. 21945 of 54959
(This msg. is a reply to 21935 by Cactus Flower)

Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

The questions I would ask as a Supreme Court Justice:

1. Is this EO the product of one person's ideas, or those of several people (including the Head of Homeland Security)?

2. If the answer is several .... Is there evidence that all of those people share an animus towards Islam?

3. If the answer is, there is not .... Then does the text of the EO exhibit religious animus?

4. If it does not .... Then if this EO was published by another President with no religious animus but a legal security purpose, would it be permissible?

5. If it was .... Then one might reasonably conclude that the President's alleged motive doesn't matter. Any animus was removed during the drafting procedure, leaving nothing malignant in the text.

6. Whereas, if you allow motive to deny the Administration its lawful power, then the Court is playing the role of Executive in matters of security. And this is a role the Supreme Court has not shown the desire to perform.


- - - - -
View Replies (1) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: Appeals court upholds nationwide ban against Trump's travel ban
By: Cactus Flower
in ALEA
Fri, 26 May 17 1:49 AM
Msg. 21935 of 54959

Again, I am surprised. The first travel ban was DOA. But I thought the second would pass muster.

Basically, the courts are peering behind the curtain and saying motive matters. I didn't think they would for security issues once the language was cleaned up and the distinction made between US persons and others.


« ALEA Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next