BREAKING: 9th Circuit Rules AGAINST PROTECTING the U.S. – IOTW Report

BREAKING: 9th Circuit Rules AGAINST PROTECTING the U.S.

Thursday, 9 February 2017, 19:17 Mr.Pinko Home 35

Liberal 9th Circuit Court Rules AGAINST Protecting America



POLITOPINION POLL – How is President Donald Trump doing? Approval/Disapproval POLL

About Mr.Pinko 686 Articles
DEPLORABLE - FOLLOWED by the BEST on TWITTER and GAB. Making Liberal Heads Explode One Empty Skull at a Time! Check out PolitOpinion.com

35 Comments on BREAKING: 9th Circuit Rules AGAINST PROTECTING the U.S.

  8. Democrats OWN this… if we get nailed by some fuck head. Democrats absolutely HATE America and Americans, and the People are watching this BS unfold in real time.

    You should hear how sheepishly NPR was talking this evening after this ruling. THEY KNOW that if something goes wrong during the 4 years of Trump… THEY ARE TO BLAME.

    I’m pissed. Can you tell?

  11. They should probably break it into 3 parts. That would take 2/3 of the cases away from them. It’s big enough to do this. When Flakey Flake was on Fox talking about this, he was saying they would put the second court in WA state. That is f**king INSANE. They need to place it in a conservative state, or the 12th? will be just like the 9th.

  14. Well, so much for 8 USC 1182 and Article II of the US Constitution.

    Instead we have a judiciary that has put the welfare of aliens above the safety of the US citizen. If it’s determined an alien who entered the count during this stay commits criminal or terrorist acts, these four judfges and the AGs of WA and MN must be held criminally liable along with violating their oaths to protect and defend the US Constitution.

  17. The US Circuit Court system was developed for the purpose of serving justice in the sparsely populated areas of the country, with the justices traveling their “circuit” by horseback to hold court in towns not large enough to justify their own courthouses.
    They are obsolete.
    There should be a rule that they still should have to ride their circuits on horseback. Then all the ancient and feeble libtard judges wouldn’t be able to participate.

  19. The ruling was evidently made by two effeminate males and one “maker” (as Hillary says).

    It’ll be fun to watch this get overturned, or better yet morphed into another more serious NEW executive order.

    Ultimately this is good politically for the conservative base and for the SCOTUS appointment(s).

    Trump is going to prevail from this.

  20. This is the very thing that Thomas Jefferson warned of if the judiciary has sole power of constitutional interpretation:

    “…The constitution, on this hypothesis, is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please.” Letter from Jefferson to Judge Roane 1819

  22. I just scanned the top MSM sites headlines, and I cannot find a singe burning limo or a Starbucks being destroyed anywhere over this ruling. The airports are clear, and no masked men dressed in black are attacking women.

    Remind me again who are the violent extremist and who are the tolerant ones?

  24. Loser Hillary is gloating about it on Twitter, the rancid bitch. She doesn’t give a crap if Islamic radicals get into this country through the front door. She doesn’t care if Americans die. When will that hag drop dead?

  25. Republicans will never learn that we’re in a war with the LEFT. Remember all those McCain and Graham votes confirming every one of Obama’s pil-puling leftist judges? This is why you don’t do that, dip shits.

  30. I don’t know $hit about the current laws and regulations we have for our immigration policy but would I imagine that the enforcement could be done such that a uncrossed T or un-dotted I are grounds for rejection. Make the enforcement of the current rules so bleepin’ anal that any itsy-bitsy mistake gets you booted; NO exceptions.

  31. See that punchable fuck face in the middle. His name is William Canby. He was my Constitutional Law professor at ASU. That guy gave me a 72 on my Con Law Final when I should have aced it. This PC inspired atrocity greviously damaged my GPA and class standing and eventually kept me from getting into the legal proffession

    Because I was a real history scholar in my youth I thought I would be hot shit in Con Law. So I was shocked when I saw a 72 posted next to my number on the grade list.

    So I was able to look at my final and the model answers and found that I had flunked the 4th of 4 essay question. This last question was a situation that pitted the nation’s security against the interest of a left wing journalist who was about to publish some extremely dangerous secret information that could have led to all out war with the USSR. And I think the issue was one of prior restraint and whether the President (Reagan at the time) could squelch this info

    So, based on the idea that the Constitution wasn’t a suicide pact, I argued in favor of the prior restraint. And of course, Canby’s preferred answer was to fetishize the First Amendment, even if it cost of millions of lives and argue in favor of the sainted Anti-American journalist.

    Twenty years later, this issue did come up in the context of the War on Terror, and guess what — The Supreme Court did rule the way I predicted it would. And seeing as how these essays are graded on a curve that would have meant I was one of a very few who got this question right. Meanwhile, the vast majority of the non-patriotic student shitheads got full credit — and careers in law undermining everything America once stood for.

    That’s a true story, Fur

  32. Of course they did.

    The Ninth Circus is an appendage of the progressive movement.

    What have I said about progressivism? Have I not repeatedly said that the progressive movement is totally invested in increasing innocent human suffering, misery and death? And how better to inflict suffering, misery and death of innocent human beings than by setting unvettable immigrants, that by admission include ISIS terrorists loose in their midst?

  34. How about a new law that says if a federal court has its rulings overturned 33% of the time on appeal then all of those judges supporting the majority of those overturned opinions will be automatically removed from office and disbarred for violating their oath to faithfully and impartially execute their duties.

  35. That’s fine. Let SCOTUS overturn them and get the bill breaking up the 9th circuit onto the floor for a vote. My only concern would be how the current Judges would be treated. Is it the law that they have to be redistributed to the new oourt or do they all stay with the 9th and the 12th (assuming that’s the new one) get all new Judges appointed? The latter would be best as Trump could then appoint real Judges to the new Circuit and leave the poison on the 9th. In any event, Trump needs to get this overturned although even with SCOTUS back up to 9 I’m not sure this is a slam dunk.

Comments are closed.

iOTWreport.com ©2024 ----- iOTWreport is not responsible for the content of comments. All opinions in comments are solely the commenter's.