hoosierdoc
Freed prisoner
That works until you get a judge basing a ruling on personal feelings, again, then this is all back out the window.
How about when they look to international law to decide US cases?
That works until you get a judge basing a ruling on personal feelings, again, then this is all back out the window.
How about when they look to international law to decide US cases?
How about when they look to international law to decide US cases?
Is this related to the immigration EO? If so, can you provide more information? I'm not following.
Generally, US treaties are considered binding at a near-constitutional level. So, it can be appropriate for judges to use international law sometimes.
Can permanent resident status be revoked? It's probably a good idea in some cases!Ok, but that when did that happen? Robart, apparently, at least has a legally defensible position in his ruling.
Of note, the gov't hasn't established that permanent residents are excluded from the EO. That's probably the most significant hurdle IMHO.
Can permanent resident status be revoked? It's probably a good idea in some cases!
Ah, right.Opinio Juris » Blog Archive Justice Ginsburg on Using Foreign and International Law in Constitutional Adjudication - Opinio Juris
it was kagan's nomination hearing . I still think he should have been blocked
hey I'm for following the law but I'm also down for using loopholes just like the bad guys doYes. It can be revoked by the proper authorities after due process.
So, a local prosecutor can't revoke it. But, the DOJ can, after a process where they allege and prove the activities that would cause the revocation and the accused has an opportunity to defend it.
I have no doubt that it is appropriate sometimes.
I'm also fairly confident some one INGO would not use the authority appropriately.
Ah, right.
Judges should look to every possible source to assist in understanding something - including sources that challenge any preconceived notions. These sources have different priorities or values, but I see no reason to exclude "international law" as something to consider.
The irony is that to get it faster and cheaper, he'd have to use the labor that he's trying to stop.Wonder where we can get a bet in for faster and cheaper?
Judiciary trumps Exec.
Not quite accurate (?). Thought it was checks and balances.
That particular circuit has an 86% overturn rate.
I don't expect today's ruling to last long.
I wonder if Trump has something up his sleeve. Something like banning ALL immigration for 90 days since they won't stay this case... If he bans all immigration, they can't use the religious discrimination angle.
I think the President should sign a new executive order that is more specific and basicly does the same thing or even more.
So how can these liberal and not impartial judges be removed?
Sounds like they're going to come out with new regs/EO next week, while still pursuing the litigation.
Could work out well for him.
I agree. I think he should just keep moving forward.I'll wait and see if there is one and what it says, but I could award up to 5 points for that move.
Do it. The right way of course.AP: Amid legal setback, President Donald Trump says he's considering signing a 'brand new order' on immigration.