2nd Travel Ban Halted by Fed Judge

by
March 16, 2017

694940094001_5361077875001_5361075113001-vsPresident Trump’s revised travel ban was put on hold Wednesday by a federal judge in Hawaii just hours before it was set to take effect after hearing arguments that the executive order discriminates on the basis of nationality.

Trump addressed the judge’s move during a rally in Nashville, Tennessee calling it “unprecedented judicial overreach” and vowed to fight.

“We’re going to win. We’re going to keep our citizens safe,” Trump said. “The danger is clear. The law is clear. The need for my executive order is clear.”

The ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Derrick Watson prevents the executive order from going into effect, at least for now. Hawaii had requested a temporary restraining order.

112 Comments - what are your thoughts?

  • snowyriver says:

    Strange happening.. This Judge and the other one that are both protesting Trumps travel ban are… Get this, both Muslim imports and appointees by Obama..

  • Askjrsk says:

    So refreshing that ninth court of appeals has ruled on PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP on what’s been popularly called the travel ban. The Communist OBAMA Muslim puppet appointees such as this dirty judge Dairy the merry fairy Watson orders are all Obamas. That has all been ruled against today. That Watson decision cannot ever be cited in case case law it is so ” “misplaced”. Vacationing in Hawaii Scumboat Obamas coincidentally, ha! The failure of and the fraudulent presidency of Obamas needs to be shot down. The inflated ego, Obamas thinks he is going to continue to rule over us and continue to destroy us and the USA. Having gotten by for eight years with his executive orders, bypassing congress he and his Nazi totalitarian dictatorship destroyed in eight years what has taken life times to build. OBAMAGATE will become huge, we will come to find out that OBAMAS treason and sedition and lying con game will be exposed and game over. Watergate will be paled by this huge scandal that is to be uncovered .

  • Tiger says:

    Try this on for size. Just sent to me by a poster. The 9th District Court of Appeals just raked the 9th Circuit over the coals in a scathing rebuke of their decision and appears they understand the laws, they don’t tell the POTUS what to do, they said the laws and Constitution on his side.

    http://ijr.com/2017/03/826494-judges-9th-circuit-just-torched-courts-decision-trump-travel-ban-correct-many-obvious-errors/?utm_source=email&utm_campaign=conservative-daily&utm_medium=owned

    No degree in law yet but have always been interested and who knows my go back to school for Constitutional Law.

    1. Askjrsk says:

      Absolutely you should

  • justinwachin says:

    This radical judge is throwing the door open to all terrorists to come to America while they can. He knows that the terrorists are likely to go to America’s mainland rather than Hawaii.

    We continue to see just how much anti-American crap is in the swamp. It may be time to elect federal judges rather than giving them lavish lifetime appointments. By the way, a different report said he issued a 43 page ruling a few hours after hearing the case. It’s safe to say he had no intention of upholding the president’s ban. This is judicial activism at its purest.

  • nokabosh says:

    Like Obama they think the US Constitution extends beyond the US borders except within it.

  • nokabosh says:

    Apparently only atheists or people with no religion can be banned from entrance according to the logic of this dopey judge.

  • Askjrsk says:

    Rogue dirty weak judges need to be challenged in open court. Federal a MARSHALLS must arrest OBAMA and also his puppet appointee and Hawaiian schoolmate. Dairy Watson. (Dairy Fairy) NOW. We voted PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP not a flunkee weak dirty judge with a OBAMA behind him . This is outrageous we have had enough. Eight years of Obamas totalitarian dictatorship is over. LOCK OBAMA UP. AND HIS FLUNKEE WEAK APPOINTED JUDGE

  • CharlieSeattle says:

    >> Radical Islamic Terrorists …Radical islam …Muslim Extremists? …No!

    The real “Radical Muslim Extremists” are the ones that do NOT attack, murder, rape infidels or support those that do. But that civilized act puts themselves in danger of attack, for Apostasy.

    Apostasy in Islam (Arabic: ردة‎‎ riddah or ارتداد irtidād) is commonly defined as the conscious abandonment of Islam by a Muslim in word or through deed. The definition of apostasy from Islam and its appropriate punishment(s) are controversial, and they vary among Islamic scholars and Islamic schools of thought.

    …The usual punishment is death!

    ~~~ The following explains it!

    “There is no such thing as a Moderate Muslim, only Apostate ones!”

    https://stumpknocker77.wordpress.com/2015/12/06/there-is-no-such-thing-as-a-moderate-muslim-only-apostate-ones/

    Many Muslims living in Islamic countries have no problem with the rule of putting apostates to death. The examples of Robert Hussein of Kuwait, Abdul Rahman of Afghanistan, and Bahaa el-Din Ahmed Hussein el-Akkad of Egypt come to mind. These ugly Muslim governments are succored by the West’s finances and blood while they impose an imperial and brutal religion upon its citizens.

    On the other hand, Muslims living in the West are embarrassed by this death sentence. The West values the freedoms of thought and speech, Islam does not, and these virtues have never blossomed under Islamic rule. Consequently, when asked about the Islamic law for apostates many Western Muslims do their best to cover up Islam’s edict. Motivated by conviction, or shame, they make up various defenses and say whatever they can to put your mind at ease and make Islam more acceptable to a naïve, gullible, and ignorant Western audience.

    >>> The way around that little Catch 22, …is to lie.

    >>> The Taqiyya Factor

    http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/11/the_taqiyya_factor.html

    Taqiyya is an Islamic doctrine that allows Muslims to deceive non-Muslims. As in lie to them. Dr. Sami Mukaram, author of Taqiyya in Islam, writes: “Taqiyya is of fundamental importance in Islam. Practically every Islamic sect agrees to it and practices it…

    >>> Former President Obama expertly practiced Taqiyya.

  • CharlieSeattle says:

    In every WESTERN country where Muslims are in the minority, they are obsessed with minority rights.
    In every ISLAMIC country with a Muslim majority, …there are no minority rights!

    islam is NOT a religion of peace!!
    islam is a sick and twisted terrorist ideology that is
    completely incompatible with western civilization!!

    Deport all muslims, CITIZENS OR not, from the west at once!!
    Ban all muslims from traveling to the west, …FOREVER

    Trump is correct.
    Implement muslim control, NOT gun control.

    Defending your person, your family, your country from attack and invasion from those forcing a violent, terrorist, genocidal ideology on western civilization…is …not … islamophobia ….or racist. ….It is just common sense.

    The people of the USA, Europe, Britain and Canada must throw down their treasonous leaders forcing this evil upon them.

    The USA just did!

  • CharlieSeattle says:

    The US does NOT need to allow thousands of backward, 7th century, unvetted and violent muslim savages into our country that have ‘enshrined’ sexual slavery, rape, forced conversion, murder and genocide in their FAKE religion!

  • Gary Hull says:

    This and other judges that are doing this because they hate Trump. They also feel they are above the law. If a judge orders someone to do something or not do something in any legal case can fine, jail or both to person who decides they will not comply. Therefore, why shouldn’t this hold true for judges that will not comply with presidential order? Once again the liberal courts are the ones who are hypocrites, bigots and racist. Gary

    1. Rodney Steward says:

      The power of the system, all are above the law apparently, nothing is ever done to them!!

  • Roy Fredrichsen says:

    Well, If just one Illegal from any of the countries on Trumps list commits a crime, then arrest all the judges that blocked that order, then charge them as being an accomplis to that crime and try them,t oo.

  • Bob says:

    When are we going to right the lies being spread about this travel restriction? First off, Religion has little to do with it. There are 57 Majority Muslim countries in the world. The restriction effects 6, or 10.5%, of the countries. Second, this does NOT effect those living in the other 89.5% of the countries, those living in non-Muslim Majority countries, or those who are from these countries yet have permission already to come to the US. Third, it is only for 90 to 120 days, not a permanent ban. If this were an actual “ban” none of these would be true.
    Realizing it is so very hard for liberals to understand what is not expressly said to them in language and terms their bigoted little minds can comprehend, but those are the FATCS of the travel restrictions. It is not like calling a tax something else to get away with levying it without Congressional Approval. It is not like saying the “Shovel ready jobs weren’t as – heh heh – shovel ready as we thought”. It’s certainly not a complete disrespect to an organized religion, like demanding that a person of faith be required by Presidential Edict to violate those beliefs so the same President can keep a campaign promise.

    1. Askjrsk says:

      IGNORE these anti American Obamas appointed stooges to what they really are. PRESS DONALD TRUMP must become more aggressive. Under federal law, our PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP should implement this ban immigration to secure America. Send federal agents to arrest these renegade Muslim dirty judges–who are not president know nothing of what’s in federal briefings classified and top secret. Do it now. Imprison these animals. Low life judge from Hawaii telling we the people and President Donald Trump what to do, as if he knows ANYTHING. DIRTY JUDGE DAIRY WATSON IS A HAWAIIAN MORON.

  • metheoldsarge says:

    This judge was just passing the buck on to the 9th Circuit court. This is only a stall tactic. This will eventually end up in the US Supreme Court. Even if Trump’s pick gets on the court in time, the Obama Five are still there. It will all depend on which way Roberts will swing. He hasn’t gone against Obama yet. Is it possible that the judges have skeletons in their closets that the liberals know about?

  • cathylovesyou says:

    Democrats today are truly un-American. They have this weird idea of making us a complete la la land at any expense even handing us over to the Chinese. Democrats are Commuist in thinking but weaklings when it comes to a fight.
    Totally disgraceful. As an American I am ashamed of having them going under the same monica as I do “American”

  • Bob says:

    I wonder if Chump and his herd are getting tired of winning yet? Oh wait, he hasn’t won ANY YET! Maybe he’s getting tired of losing! BEING THE LOSER HE IS! I love hearing the Putin Puppet lovers – squealing like pigs!!!!

  • Mike Thomas says:

    I would tell the Hawaiian judge, you want them we will give you all of them and the same goes for all those protesting in the streets. Take names and addresses of those marching and let them know we are sending them to your house to live and take care of.

  • longnkrnch says:

    This judge was paid, signed sealed and delivered, before the E.O. was ever even written.

  • longnkrnch says:

    F this judge! The left will judge shop every attempt Trump makes to protect us. They will always be able to find a liberal judge ready for an easy payday. I say Trump should order DHS to follow through anyway and dare this judge to do anything about it.

  • Rodney Steward says:

    Seems that the brown clown has these socialist judges stuffed every where and they are going to make Trumps life miserable while in office! The shadow Gov. by Obama, wonder who the brains were behind this, he wasn’t smart enough to do this on his own!!

  • regulus30 says:

    take it to the SCOTUS after Gorsuch is appointed; then impeach every state Judge who has executed a stay for judicial OVERREACH.

  • Oldawg70 says:

    Remove every Obama appointed official and replace them with american patriots!

  • edorr1atcoxdotnet says:

    I know it seems kind of harsh, but perhaps Pres. Trump should ask all Obummer appointees to resign voluntarily, or be FIRED and people who firmly believe in the law be appointed. We don’t need judges like this last one opening the doors for more terrorists. Obummer let enough in before he left office.

    1. Bob says:

      Yeah, we need more judges like Scalia, who stabbed the average American in the back for many, many years. Sure we do!!!

  • ch says:

    And here is why. obama has his hands all over this. He will not be happy until we are inundated with his fellow muslimes.

    http://blabber.buzz/politics/117691-coincidence-obama-makes-surprise-visit-to-hawaii-48-hours-before-judge-blocks-trump-travel-ban

  • Rock says:

    Hopefully the Radical Muslims flowing into the U.S, due to these liberal and almost GUARANTEED Democrat Judges, focus their “intentions” on said judges and/or their followers.

  • PBHayes says:

    It would be ironic if these activist judges were the first to die in an Islamic attack. Maybe some crazy Muslim will read this post and take action.

  • Patriot47 says:

    The pause is based on sources of terrorists, which AMAZINGLY corresponds to Islamic countries. The only ones shocked are libtards.

  • CBUJAN says:

    What did you expect Hawaii is a democratic state.

  • J Wayne Watson says:

    What a true, real, horrible embarrasment for us with the same last name! He surely must be a fake Watson! Hope that you all realize that Islam is not just a religion but an ideology, like communism, socialism, etc. It is a complete way of life that is 100% against all that we stand for as a free society and must be stopped from influencing our nation. This is not religious descrimination because this is not a “religion” as we typically know religion to be. Their religion calls for the killing or subjugation of ALL who not agree with them! Please, learn about Islam and help your friends to learn about it as well.You would do well to save this article for reference!
    http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/articles/quran-peaceful.aspx

    1. Askjrsk says:

      So sorry. That dirty Judge appointee DIRTY JUDGE DAIRY WATSON more Obamas twisted convuluted behavior working against the good of America and Americans.

  • Cadfael says:

    Bring a lawsuit against this clown judge and remove from the bench for “bad” (meaning biased partisan) behavior without further pay, or pension, or law license. Time to send a message and set an example!

    1. Askjrsk says:

      Yes. A lawsuit against this dirty judge, another Obamas clunker flunkee. Now is the time. This is against. WE THE PEOPLE

  • Jan says:

    When there is another terrorist attack on US soil we will know who to blame.

    1. Askjrsk says:

      That’s not ok. Rid ourselves of this Obamas appointee now. How do we know he isn’t a terrorist? He could be plotting another. 9/11 for all we know. Dirty Judge.

  • James Maxwell says:

    Time to make the “activist” judges responsible for their decisions. Since they
    do not want to follow the laws and be criminal activist if they allow the visitation
    of members from terrorist states into the USA then they must take them into
    their homes and be responsible for them and their action until they can be
    properly vetted by DHS and INS for entry into the United States. These
    “activist” left wing Liberal moonbeams are playing politics with American
    Lives and safety. They should be removed form the bench and not allowed
    to render any judgements until they have taken and passed a course in
    Constitutional laws and the duties and responsibilities of the President of
    the United States and the Constitutionally authorized actions that a President
    can take with out Congressional permission and the time frame allowed.
    Apparently they either do not know their jobs are else they are third
    columnist active working towards the destruction and invasion of our
    Nation by our Enemies.

    1. Askjrsk says:

      Yes accountability. Your fired dirty Judge. You work against WE THE PEOPLE

  • Askjrsk says:

    This dirty Judge Dairy Watson is guilty of insubordination . Strip this OBAMA appointee of his position which he is not worthy of. WE THE PEOPLE VOTED PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP because of his platform. This dirty Judge is an affront to we the people and risks our safety and security, at our airports and vetting those coming into our country properly. Arrest him, strip him of his OBAMA appointed power and send him to GITMO

  • Webb says:

    2nd Travel Ban Halted by Fed Judge…
    By a federal judge in Hawaii and also in Maryland now…
    This shows a Bias against Trump and most assuredly is Political and Not The Rule Of Law…The Travel Ban had the same countries as Obama’s!
    Will Trump prevail…

  • Tiger says:

    9e. The Power of the Federal Courts

    Not everyone agrees on how much power the judicial branch should
    have. After all, federal judges and justices are appointed, not elected.
    As most Americans believe in democracy, shouldn’t elected officials run
    the country?

    On the other hand, perhaps American government would be fairer if
    judges had even more power. Because they do not have to worry about
    reelection, they are relieved of the outside pressure of public opinion.

    After all, the majority is not always right. It is no accident that
    the Founders provided for elected officials in the legislature and
    appointed officials in the judiciary. They believed that freedom,
    equality, and justice are best achieved by a balance between the two
    branches of government.

    Checks on Judicial Power

    Although
    the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Cherokee, its decision was not
    enforced. Nearly 4,000 Cherokee died on the Trail of Tears as a result
    of the Indian removals.

    The president and Congress have some control of the judiciary with
    their power to appoint and confirm appointments of judges and justices.
    Congress also may impeach judges (only seven have actually been removed
    from office), alter the organization of the federal court system, and
    amend the Constitution.

    Congress can also get around a court ruling by passing a slightly different law than one previously declared unconstitutional.

    Courts also have limited power to implement the decisions that they
    make. For example, if the president or another member of the executive
    branch chooses to ignore a ruling, there is very little that the federal
    courts can do about it.

    For example, the Supreme Court ruled against the removal of the
    Cherokee from their native lands in 1831. President Andrew Jackson
    disagreed. He proceeded with the removal of the Cherokee, and the
    Supreme Court was powerless to enforce its decision.

    The Power of the Courts

    Will Counts/APThe 1954 Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka
    regarding integration of schools was not enforced until three years
    later, when Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas, was
    integrated. Elizabeth Eckford, one of the first African American
    students to attend Central, was heckled on her way to school each
    morning.

    The federal courts’ most important power is that of judicial review,
    the authority to interpret the Constitution. When federal judges rule
    that laws or government actions violate the spirit of the Constitution,
    they profoundly shape public policy. For example, federal judges have
    declared over 100 federal laws unconstitutional.

    Another measure of the Supreme Court’s power is its ability to overrule itself. In 1954, the Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka that schools segregated by race were unconstitutional. This reversed the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision that upheld the doctrine of “separate but equal.”

    For the most part, though, federal courts do have a great deal of
    respect for previous decisions. A very strong precedent called stare decisis (“let the decision stand”) directs judges to be cautious about overturning decisions made by past courts.

    An act of the legislature repugnant to the Constitution is void…. It
    is emphatically the province of the judicial department to say what the
    law is.John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison (1803)

    Words which, ordinarily and in many places, would be within the freedom
    of speech protected by the First Amendment, may become subject to
    prohibition when of such a nature and used in such circumstances as to
    create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the
    substantive evils which Congress has a right to prevent. The character
    of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done.Oliver Wendell Holmes, Schenck v. the United States (1919)

    The judgments below, except that, in the Delaware case, are accordingly
    reversed, and the cases are remanded to the District Courts to take such
    proceedings and enter such orders and decrees consistent with this
    opinion as are necessary and proper to admit to public schools on a
    racially nondiscriminatory basis with all deliberate speed the parties
    to these cases.Earl Warren, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1955)

    I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material [pornography] …[B]ut I know it when I see it.Potter Stewart, Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964)

    Charles
    Evans Hughes was first appointed to the Supreme Court in 1910, but left
    the Court to run for president in 1916. He was reappointed to the
    Supreme Court as Chief Justice in 1930.

    Judicial Activism versus Judicial Restraint

    The lack of agreement regarding the policy making power of courts is
    reflected in the debate over judicial activism versus judicial
    restraint. Judicial activists believe that the federal courts must
    correct injustices that are perpetuated or ignored by the other
    branches.

    For example, minority rights have often been ignored partly because
    majorities impose their will on legislators. Prayers in public schools
    support the beliefs of the majority but ignore the rights of the
    minority. The Constitution is often loosely interpreted to meet the
    issues of the present. In the words of former Justice Charles Evans
    Hughes, “We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the
    judges say it is.”

    Supporters of judicial restraint point out that appointed judges are
    immune to public opinion, and if they abandon their role as careful and
    cautious interpreters of the Constitution, they become unelected
    legislators. According to Justice Antonin Scalia, “The Constitution is
    not an empty bottle….It is like a statute, and the meaning doesn’t
    change.”

    Despite the debate over what constitutes the appropriate amount of
    judicial power, the United States federal courts remain the most
    powerful judicial system in world history. Their power is enhanced by
    life terms for judges and justices, and they play a major role in
    promoting the core American values of freedom, equality, and justice.

    NOTICE PLEASE TRUMP CAN IGNORE THESE JUDGES AND GO THROUGH WITH HIS BAN ETC JUST LIKE ANDREW JACKSON DID AND LIKE I SAID NOTHING THE COURTS CAN DO ABOUT IT.

    1. Askjrsk says:

      Absolutely

  • Tiger says:

    They do not have the right to stop this. They are indeed overstepping their bounds. The Courts don’t tell the POTUS what to do, that is not their job but he has the Law and the Constitution behind him and needs to just DO IT.

    What are the courts going to do? Trump is the Commander of the Military, he is the last word in our agencies so what are they gong to do????? They can’t go after him or set someone to arrest him.

    They need to be taken out and some on the Supreme Court need Impeachment.

    1. Askjrsk says:

      Thank you Tiger you are a dear. You did some time consuming posts. I just want you to know we appreciate it greatly. This dirty Judge must be removed stripped of his power. These Obamas appointees are not for the good of America and our safety and security. DIRTY JUDGE DAIRY WATSON

      1. Tiger says:

        Thank you I needed that. Welcome it is a learning experience for me and our laws along with the abuse of the powers have so crossed the line it will take a Revolution to straighten them out.

    2. Timothy Raffety says:

      Under normal circumstances, a Supreme Court Justice is awarded a lifetime commission. A Supreme Court Justice may be impeached by the House of Representatives and removed from office if convicted in a Senate trial, but only for the same types of offenses that would trigger impeachment proceedings for any other government official under Articles I and II of the Constitution. Article III, Section 1 states that judges of Article III courts shall hold their offices ” DURING GOOD BEHAVIOR”. The phrase ” GOOD BEHAVIOR” has been interpreted by the courts to equate to the same level of seriousness ” HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS” encompasses. In the United States, impeachment is MOST often used to remove “CORRUPT” lower-court Federal judges from office. It’s a hard road to travel, but yes Supreme Court Justices can be removed right along with the 9th Circus court judges. Hope this helps.

      1. Tiger says:

        Indeed it does and never was the time more ripe than right now with Trump president but you and I know it is the snakes in the swamp he wants to drain that he has to deal with daily for anything that he can’t do via EO etc.

  • Raul says:

    Until resolved, send all incoming from terrorist countries to CA, HI, WA, OR, MN with restrictions to move to other states.

    1. Tiger says:

      Trump can just do it. The courts can’t stop him just as they couldn’t stop Andrew Jackson from moving the Cherokee.

      9e. The Power of the Federal Courts

      Not everyone agrees on how much power the judicial branch should
      have. After all, federal judges and justices are appointed, not elected.
      As most Americans believe in democracy, shouldn’t elected officials run
      the country?

      On the other hand, perhaps American government would be fairer if
      judges had even more power. Because they do not have to worry about
      reelection, they are relieved of the outside pressure of public opinion.

      After all, the majority is not always right. It is no accident that
      the Founders provided for elected officials in the legislature and
      appointed officials in the judiciary. They believed that freedom,
      equality, and justice are best achieved by a balance between the two
      branches of government.

      Checks on Judicial Power

      Although
      the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Cherokee, its decision was not
      enforced. Nearly 4,000 Cherokee died on the Trail of Tears as a result
      of the Indian removals.

      The president and Congress have some control of the judiciary with
      their power to appoint and confirm appointments of judges and justices.
      Congress also may impeach judges (only seven have actually been removed
      from office), alter the organization of the federal court system, and
      amend the Constitution.

      Congress can also get around a court ruling by passing a slightly different law than one previously declared unconstitutional.

      Courts also have limited power to implement the decisions that they
      make. For example, if the president or another member of the executive
      branch chooses to ignore a ruling, there is very little that the federal
      courts can do about it.

      For example, the Supreme Court ruled against the removal of the
      Cherokee from their native lands in 1831. President Andrew Jackson
      disagreed. He proceeded with the removal of the Cherokee, and the
      Supreme Court was powerless to enforce its decision.

      The Power of the Courts

      Will Counts/APThe 1954 Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka
      regarding integration of schools was not enforced until three years
      later, when Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas, was
      integrated. Elizabeth Eckford, one of the first African American
      students to attend Central, was heckled on her way to school each
      morning.

      The federal courts’ most important power is that of judicial review,
      the authority to interpret the Constitution. When federal judges rule
      that laws or government actions violate the spirit of the Constitution,
      they profoundly shape public policy. For example, federal judges have
      declared over 100 federal laws unconstitutional.

      Another measure of the Supreme Court’s power is its ability to overrule itself. In 1954, the Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka that schools segregated by race were unconstitutional. This reversed the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision that upheld the doctrine of “separate but equal.”

      For the most part, though, federal courts do have a great deal of
      respect for previous decisions. A very strong precedent called stare decisis (“let the decision stand”) directs judges to be cautious about overturning decisions made by past courts.

      An act of the legislature repugnant to the Constitution is void…. It
      is emphatically the province of the judicial department to say what the
      law is.John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison (1803)

      Words which, ordinarily and in many places, would be within the freedom
      of speech protected by the First Amendment, may become subject to
      prohibition when of such a nature and used in such circumstances as to
      create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the
      substantive evils which Congress has a right to prevent. The character
      of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done.Oliver Wendell Holmes, Schenck v. the United States (1919)

      The judgments below, except that, in the Delaware case, are accordingly
      reversed, and the cases are remanded to the District Courts to take such
      proceedings and enter such orders and decrees consistent with this
      opinion as are necessary and proper to admit to public schools on a
      racially nondiscriminatory basis with all deliberate speed the parties
      to these cases.Earl Warren, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1955)

      I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material [pornography] …[B]ut I know it when I see it.Potter Stewart, Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964)

      Charles
      Evans Hughes was first appointed to the Supreme Court in 1910, but left
      the Court to run for president in 1916. He was reappointed to the
      Supreme Court as Chief Justice in 1930.

      Judicial Activism versus Judicial Restraint

      The lack of agreement regarding the policy making power of courts is
      reflected in the debate over judicial activism versus judicial
      restraint. Judicial activists believe that the federal courts must
      correct injustices that are perpetuated or ignored by the other
      branches.

      For example, minority rights have often been ignored partly because
      majorities impose their will on legislators. Prayers in public schools
      support the beliefs of the majority but ignore the rights of the
      minority. The Constitution is often loosely interpreted to meet the
      issues of the present. In the words of former Justice Charles Evans
      Hughes, “We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the
      judges say it is.”

      Supporters of judicial restraint point out that appointed judges are
      immune to public opinion, and if they abandon their role as careful and
      cautious interpreters of the Constitution, they become unelected
      legislators. According to Justice Antonin Scalia, “The Constitution is
      not an empty bottle….It is like a statute, and the meaning doesn’t
      change.”

      Despite the debate over what constitutes the appropriate amount of
      judicial power, the United States federal courts remain the most
      powerful judicial system in world history. Their power is enhanced by
      life terms for judges and justices, and they play a major role in
      promoting the core American values of freedom, equality, and justice.

      QUIZ TIME: The Judicial Branch

      1. Askjrsk says:

        Brilliant: PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP ignore this dirty Judge. He is scum with an agenda to sabotage WE THE PEOPLE.

        1. Tiger says:

          Thank you I am hoping he just enforces it Period.

      2. CrustyOldGeezer says:

        ONLY the Supreme court have “Lifetime Appointments”.

        Lower courts were not created b the Constitution but by congress.

        The President always has the option to just abolish the lower courts and start again, cut the number of ‘just us’s’ in any circuit, or limit the areas covered by the various courts.

        He can abolish the NEINth circus, and create 2 or 3 more and divide the areas in those jurisdiction.

        1. Tiger says:

          Supreme court justices can be impeached never a better time.

          The lower courts are not elected they are appointed. They can be dismantled.

          Indeed he can and he should do exactly as you say they are the swamp also.

        2. Tiger says:

          9e. The Power of the Federal Courts

          Not everyone agrees on how much power the judicial branch should
          have. After all, federal judges and justices are appointed, not elected.
          As most Americans believe in democracy, shouldn’t elected officials run
          the country?

          On the other hand, perhaps American government would be fairer if
          judges had even more power. Because they do not have to worry about
          reelection, they are relieved of the outside pressure of public opinion.

          After all, the majority is not always right. It is no accident that
          the Founders provided for elected officials in the legislature and
          appointed officials in the judiciary. They believed that freedom,
          equality, and justice are best achieved by a balance between the two
          branches of government.

          Checks on Judicial Power

          Although
          the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Cherokee, its decision was not
          enforced. Nearly 4,000 Cherokee died on the Trail of Tears as a result
          of the Indian removals.

          The president and Congress have some control of the judiciary with
          their power to appoint and confirm appointments of judges and justices.
          Congress also may impeach judges (only seven have actually been removed
          from office), alter the organization of the federal court system, and
          amend the Constitution.

          Congress can also get around a court ruling by passing a slightly different law than one previously declared unconstitutional.

          Courts also have limited power to implement the decisions that they
          make. For example, if the president or another member of the executive
          branch chooses to ignore a ruling, there is very little that the federal
          courts can do about it.

          For example, the Supreme Court ruled against the removal of the
          Cherokee from their native lands in 1831. President Andrew Jackson
          disagreed. He proceeded with the removal of the Cherokee, and the
          Supreme Court was powerless to enforce its decision.

          The Power of the Courts

          Will Counts/APThe 1954 Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka
          regarding integration of schools was not enforced until three years
          later, when Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas, was
          integrated. Elizabeth Eckford, one of the first African American
          students to attend Central, was heckled on her way to school each
          morning.

          The federal courts’ most important power is that of judicial review,
          the authority to interpret the Constitution. When federal judges rule
          that laws or government actions violate the spirit of the Constitution,
          they profoundly shape public policy. For example, federal judges have
          declared over 100 federal laws unconstitutional.

          Another
          measure of the Supreme Court’s power is its ability to overrule itself.
          In 1954, the Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. Board of Education of
          Topeka that schools segregated by race were unconstitutional. This
          reversed the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision that upheld the doctrine
          of “separate but equal.”

          For the most part, though, federal courts do have a great deal of
          respect
          for previous decisions. A very strong precedent called stare decisis
          (“let the decision stand”) directs judges to be cautious about
          overturning decisions made by past courts.

          An act of the legislature repugnant to the Constitution is void…. It
          is emphatically the province of the judicial department to say what the
          law is.John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison (1803)

          Words which, ordinarily and in many places, would be within the freedom
          of speech protected by the First Amendment, may become subject to
          prohibition when of such a nature and used in such circumstances as to
          create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the
          substantive evils which Congress has a right to prevent. The character
          of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done.Oliver Wendell Holmes, Schenck v. the United States (1919)

          The judgments below, except that, in the Delaware case, are accordingly
          reversed, and the cases are remanded to the District Courts to take such
          proceedings and enter such orders and decrees consistent with this
          opinion as are necessary and proper to admit to public schools on a
          racially nondiscriminatory basis with all deliberate speed the parties
          to these cases.Earl Warren, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1955)

          I
          shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material
          [pornography] …[B]ut I know it when I see it.Potter Stewart,
          Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964)

          Charles
          Evans Hughes was first appointed to the Supreme Court in 1910, but left
          the Court to run for president in 1916. He was reappointed to the
          Supreme Court as Chief Justice in 1930.

          Judicial Activism versus Judicial Restraint

          The lack of agreement regarding the policy making power of courts is
          reflected in the debate over judicial activism versus judicial
          restraint. Judicial activists believe that the federal courts must
          correct injustices that are perpetuated or ignored by the other
          branches.

          For example, minority rights have often been ignored partly because
          majorities impose their will on legislators. Prayers in public schools
          support the beliefs of the majority but ignore the rights of the
          minority. The Constitution is often loosely interpreted to meet the
          issues of the present. In the words of former Justice Charles Evans
          Hughes, “We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the
          judges say it is.”

          Supporters of judicial restraint point out that appointed judges are
          immune to public opinion, and if they abandon their role as careful and
          cautious interpreters of the Constitution, they become unelected
          legislators. According to Justice Antonin Scalia, “The Constitution is
          not an empty bottle….It is like a statute, and the meaning doesn’t
          change.”

          Despite the debate over what constitutes the appropriate amount of
          judicial power, the United States federal courts remain the most
          powerful judicial system in world history. Their power is enhanced by
          life terms for judges and justices, and they play a major role in
          promoting the core American values of freedom, equality, and justice.

    2. Askjrsk says:

      State capitals, only. Not among the people publish names where residing that folks can get locked and loaded.

  • CrustyOldGeezer says:

    The list of politically appointed morons sitting on Judicial Benches and posing as ‘judges’ seems to be growing longer.

    The solution to the problem is simple.

    Send in the US Marshals, arrest them in the courtrooms they foolishly refer to as “THEIR courts”.

    Take them directly to the airport and ship them directly to GITMO and charge them as DOMESTIC ENEMIES of the United States.

    THAT is exactly what they are!

    Military Tribunal and Leavenworth for life without parole.

    How long would it take for all the corrupt just us’s resign and leave the country?

    1. pappy450 says:

      If you heard ALL the news you will find that the so-called “judge” is a OSCUMBAG “appointee”. (so there is NO “surprise” there) AND YES these “judges” that overstep thier bounds, should be hauled out kicking and screaming and thrown into the jails that THEY send people to, and REPLACE them with someone that will actually abide by their OATH OF OFFICE and NOT “rule” by their “personal feelings”

      1. Tiger says:

        Trump can just go ahead and do it and the courts can’t do a damned thing about it.

        9e. The Power of the Federal Courts

        Not everyone agrees on how much power the judicial branch should
        have. After all, federal judges and justices are appointed, not elected.
        As most Americans believe in democracy, shouldn’t elected officials run
        the country?

        On the other hand, perhaps American government would be fairer if
        judges had even more power. Because they do not have to worry about
        reelection, they are relieved of the outside pressure of public opinion.

        After all, the majority is not always right. It is no accident that
        the Founders provided for elected officials in the legislature and
        appointed officials in the judiciary. They believed that freedom,
        equality, and justice are best achieved by a balance between the two
        branches of government.

        Checks on Judicial Power

        Although
        the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Cherokee, its decision was not
        enforced. Nearly 4,000 Cherokee died on the Trail of Tears as a result
        of the Indian removals.

        The president and Congress have some control of the judiciary with
        their power to appoint and confirm appointments of judges and justices.
        Congress also may impeach judges (only seven have actually been removed
        from office), alter the organization of the federal court system, and
        amend the Constitution.

        Congress can also get around a court ruling by passing a slightly different law than one previously declared unconstitutional.

        Courts also have limited power to implement the decisions that they
        make. For example, if the president or another member of the executive
        branch chooses to ignore a ruling, there is very little that the federal
        courts can do about it.

        For example, the Supreme Court ruled against the removal of the
        Cherokee from their native lands in 1831. President Andrew Jackson
        disagreed. He proceeded with the removal of the Cherokee, and the
        Supreme Court was powerless to enforce its decision.

        The Power of the Courts

        Will Counts/APThe 1954 Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka
        regarding integration of schools was not enforced until three years
        later, when Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas, was
        integrated. Elizabeth Eckford, one of the first African American
        students to attend Central, was heckled on her way to school each
        morning.

        The federal courts’ most important power is that of judicial review,
        the authority to interpret the Constitution. When federal judges rule
        that laws or government actions violate the spirit of the Constitution,
        they profoundly shape public policy. For example, federal judges have
        declared over 100 federal laws unconstitutional.

        Another measure of the Supreme Court’s power is its ability to overrule itself. In 1954, the Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka that schools segregated by race were unconstitutional. This reversed the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision that upheld the doctrine of “separate but equal.”

        For the most part, though, federal courts do have a great deal of
        respect for previous decisions. A very strong precedent called stare decisis (“let the decision stand”) directs judges to be cautious about overturning decisions made by past courts.

        An act of the legislature repugnant to the Constitution is void…. It
        is emphatically the province of the judicial department to say what the
        law is.John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison (1803)

        Words which, ordinarily and in many places, would be within the freedom
        of speech protected by the First Amendment, may become subject to
        prohibition when of such a nature and used in such circumstances as to
        create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the
        substantive evils which Congress has a right to prevent. The character
        of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done.Oliver Wendell Holmes, Schenck v. the United States (1919)

        The judgments below, except that, in the Delaware case, are accordingly
        reversed, and the cases are remanded to the District Courts to take such
        proceedings and enter such orders and decrees consistent with this
        opinion as are necessary and proper to admit to public schools on a
        racially nondiscriminatory basis with all deliberate speed the parties
        to these cases.Earl Warren, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1955)

        I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material [pornography] …[B]ut I know it when I see it.Potter Stewart, Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964)

        Charles
        Evans Hughes was first appointed to the Supreme Court in 1910, but left
        the Court to run for president in 1916. He was reappointed to the
        Supreme Court as Chief Justice in 1930.

        Judicial Activism versus Judicial Restraint

        The lack of agreement regarding the policy making power of courts is
        reflected in the debate over judicial activism versus judicial
        restraint. Judicial activists believe that the federal courts must
        correct injustices that are perpetuated or ignored by the other
        branches.

        For example, minority rights have often been ignored partly because
        majorities impose their will on legislators. Prayers in public schools
        support the beliefs of the majority but ignore the rights of the
        minority. The Constitution is often loosely interpreted to meet the
        issues of the present. In the words of former Justice Charles Evans
        Hughes, “We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the
        judges say it is.”

        Supporters of judicial restraint point out that appointed judges are
        immune to public opinion, and if they abandon their role as careful and
        cautious interpreters of the Constitution, they become unelected
        legislators. According to Justice Antonin Scalia, “The Constitution is
        not an empty bottle….It is like a statute, and the meaning doesn’t
        change.”

        Despite the debate over what constitutes the appropriate amount of
        judicial power, the United States federal courts remain the most
        powerful judicial system in world history. Their power is enhanced by
        life terms for judges and justices, and they play a major role in
        promoting the core American values of freedom, equality, and justice.

        QUIZ TIME: The Judicial Branch

        1. Askjrsk says:

          We the people voted for PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP and safety security, immigration policies that protects us. This dirty Judge was not voted but appointed by a fraudulent president who hates America and Americans. This judge can only mean harm and compromise safety of Americans. Do what it takes to get rid of this dirty Judge.

          1. Tiger says:

            They cannot do anything to him and Congress could not impeach him if he just does this, just as they couldn’t impeach Andrew Jackson over the Trail of Tears. This “Trail of Muslims” must be stopped.

        2. Timothy Raffety says:

          Tiger, check into the Smith Act, it’s from FDR’s time.

          1. Tiger says:

            Will do thank you Tim. I am still putting off my CEU boy howdy. I am really going to have to hussle.

          2. Tiger says:

            Just did that reinforces Trump’s ban he just needs to pull an Andrew Jackson and O and just ignore the judges and do this.

        1. CrustyOldGeezer says:

          Water Spa resort.

          Waterspa treatments 6 times a day until they relax enough to begin to tell the world about the things that have been bottled up inside for far too long.

          1. Askjrsk says:

            Bottled up far too long. DEPENDS malfunctions!

        2. theseer says:

          obarry the fraud pres and his muzzie dhs sec both ignored the federal judge’s order twice to not give out green cards to illegals…they both continued to give out thousands…judge said they were in contempt of his order…but no legal action against obarry or johnson!!!

          1. Askjrsk says:

            Obuthole broke the law quite a bit it seems. Thank for the blast from the past. PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP must become more aggressively and offensive against these anti American animals, who means to do harm to America

          2. Roy Fredrichsen says:

            theseer – Of course not, what would happen if you insisted on on NOT doing as your boss told you to. Since they were appointed by his Majesty he would fire them if they ruled against him.

        3. Tiger says:

          Hearing today that a Russian bank has come to the Judicial in America to say they have been hacked. The hacking is to connect Trump to this Russian bank.

          They are out to Impeach him bottom line.

      2. podunk1 says:

        Excellent post!!

        Judge Watson is 2nd oath allegiance bound and an ideal progressive example to apply Amendment 14 Sections 3&4

        Article 2 Section 1 president “…will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
        Section 3 “…he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed…”
        Article IV Section 4 “…shall protect each of them (states) against Invasion; and… domestic Violence.”

        Article 6… The Constitution IS “SUPREME LAW… ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY NOTWITHSTANDING… AND ALL EXECUTIVE AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS, BOTH OF THE US AND SEVERAL STATES SHALL BE BOUND BY ‘ALLEGIANCE”! That includes Trump, SCOTUS, SESSIONS, and everyone else bound by 2nd oath allegiance covenants to defend the Constitution against anyone “WITHOUT ANY RESERVATION OR PURPOSE OF EVASION”!

        Amendment 14 Section 3 “No person shall… hold any office… having previously taken an oath… …(who) shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the (Constitution), or given aid or comfort to (its) enemies…”, and Section 4 “…neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States…”

        It’s time for Trump & Sessions to start bringing charges against idiots like Warson. Rebellion is TREASON… the nastiest form of comforting and aiding enemies of the Constitution!

        1. Askjrsk says:

          Well this Dairy Watson Obama appointee and school mate handed over Obamas manifesto. Weak dirty inappropriate. Federal MARSHALLS should arrest this rogue ignorant Judge
          F2-12 American law
          Arrest him and now in Hawaii. OBAMA

          1. podunk1 says:

            Maybe do like Obama’s storm troupers did to Lavoy Finnicum… ambushed a peaceful old patriotic senior citizen in knee deep snow… cut him down like a like an islamic terrorist, as he and the Bundy farmers were on the road trying to get protection from a sheriff

          2. Askjrsk says:

            I’m from Oregon and well aware. Federal MARSHALLS should arrest OBAMA and Dairy the merry fairy that thinks he is the government not just an Obamas appointed dirty judge. Unprecedented! Electric chair them! The lights would go out with all that power sucking

          3. podunk1 says:

            Treason against the country will exponentially increase as long as the public buys into the progressive lie that exposing treasonous office holders by calling them traitors (what they are), desecrates the office of honor.

            Exponential denigration is verified by the executive, congressional, & SCOTUS majority that religiously attack the Constitution daily… and the fact that none will defend against those attacks “WITHOUT ANY RESERVATION OR PURPOES OF EVASION”. The nation is being swallowed by lawlessness, chaos, deception, non-productivity, disintegration of productive skills, and hundreds of trillions in counterfeit debt security… best labeled a death spiral! Likewise, punishment disappeared.as noted.

      3. No says:

        Or perhaps they are being paid to fight Trumps executive order.

        1. pappy450 says:

          THAT would NOT surprise me at all. SOROS grimy paws (and his UNLIMITED FUNDS) might just well be in there. The “money”needs to be followed.

          1. Rodney Steward says:

            Soros’s goal was to flood the world with muslim, he has in Europe, and spent a BUNCH trying to get Hellary in! She said she would bring in 5 times what Obama would, but the plan was spoiled and now comes the judges!

          2. Askjrsk says:

            Really? Read it on the toilet stall wall. But wasn’t sure. You know how much fake news they post there. Almost as much as CNN and the worst MSNBC! They are owned by Comcast and pay less in taxes than PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP. Is that a pisser? And McDonalds–they sell this crap food, but I buy it in a hurry and their coffee–around the world because it’s consistent. NO MORE. THEYRE ON MY SHORT SH IT LIST. When are these morons going to get out of politics and try to make a better greasy fast food product? THATS WHY Ashley Judd and Rosie ODonell and whooping goldbits and Mery Streep and these HUGE man hating women have to shop and boycotted NORDSTROM.
            They spend a pile to look frumpy dumpy and it’s just a pile of garbage
            the trash man won’t touch it. How are you, buddy?

          3. Rodney Steward says:

            I be doing good, and as usual I can tell your doing good!! LOL! McDonalds is one place I will not eat, had a family member that would almost eat a dead horse that worked there for a while and said there was no way he’d eat their food, so I just took his word for it!!

          4. Askjrsk says:

            Can’t eat at McDonald poop and puke only

          5. Rodney Steward says:

            Jack’s, the best Spiced fried chicken in the fast food world!!!! But I do love MY drunken chicken, hard to beat!!

          6. Askjrsk says:

            In the box Jacks? I like El Pollo Loco haven’t done Jacks. Having you ever eaten Crazy Chicken, it started in Mexico then bought by Dennys. Healthy fast food, chicken on spit open fire, sides corn beans. My favorites Gotta say I like it

          7. Rodney Steward says:

            No haven’t heard of it, we have a Denny’s in the next town over, about 30 miles, but I’ll have to check it out! It sounds finger licken goood!!

          8. Askjrsk says:

            California and Nevada, they are for the most part. Sure hope they don’t get in politics. You guys got Dickys BBQ? They make great beef brisket had it today. I’m in the desert of Calif. For a couple more days Not far from camp opuko. Going back to Oregon this weekend. That will be fish. Salmon oysters shrimp calamari clam chowder. Pacific Northwest. Communism looks different up there than down here. So many good people here but no match for Los Angeles SanDiego illegals.

    2. Tiger says:

      They have overstepped their bounds and Trump can do his ban and they can’t do anything about it. Just as they couldn’t do anything about Andrew Jackson moved the Cherokee.

      JUST DO IT TRUMP. THEY CAN’T DO A DAMNED THING ABOUT IT. NO CONGRESS CAN’T IMPEACH HIM FOR DOING IT. HE IS IN HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT.

      1. Askjrsk says:

        Time for PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP to play hard ball. These are not gentlemen but animals who mean us harm at our expense. Soon our president will present the evidence he has to “wiretapping ” or surveillance.
        Japan Times even printed a story containing leaked information by an anonymous source between secretary of agriculture and candidate DONALD TRUMP. Velly intllesting.

        1. Tiger says:

          The wiretapping is a no brainer. Flynn resigned due to leaked conversations, wiretapping. The president has the right to ask for any information he wants from any agency. O is a slick willy and will take a cunning fox to catch that wabbit.

          As to FAKE news it always begins with “An Anonymous Source Has Told Us.”

          1. Timothy Raffety says:

            Did you see Punk Ryan saying that there was absolutely no evidence what so ever of wiretapping, none, nada, zilch. He had a smug look on his bitch face when he said that. It was said on his weakly(pun intended) address, he basically said it was all in Trumps mind, plus he said that he was going to pass his health care act come hell or high water.

          2. Tiger says:

            Yep I heard him but I also heard him say that he had seen some information that proved wiretapping. Speaking out both sides of his mouth. Trump isn’t broken and he fights and since seems like every plot against him, has been spoiled in the split of time, he will survive this also.

            He who laughs last laughs best and Trump won’t hesitate to put Ryan in his place, my guess Ryan and McConnell, McCain and Graham along with many others won’t be back after 2018.

          3. Rodney Steward says:

            Ryan has taken money from Soros, and like Tiger said, he talks out of his a$$ and mouth!!

          4. Roy Fredrichsen says:

            Timothy — Finding physical evidence of wiretapping is about as useless as looking for a needle in a haystack
            without a magnet. Now, If they can find a recording of any Trump conversation, Then they would have firm evidence that would prove the phone WAS tapped.

      2. theseer says:

        as America’s president he has a right to ban any peoples who are a threat to Americans….
        and there is plenty of proof muslims murder americans…men and women!!!!

    3. Askjrsk says:

      I absolutely think you are right on. This dirty Dairy Judge Watson, an obvious appointment of Obamas needs to be stripped of this appointment for insubordination. WE THE PEOPLE are tired of these subversives planted throughout our government. Over reach is inappropriate unacceptable and puts America and Americans at risk. Get them to GITMO.

    4. Sharron Freitas says:

      You’re a bigot! If you had half of the compassion and intellect they have in one finger you wouldn’t make a remark like that. What if one of your children married a muslim? Would you send her out of the country or put her in jail? Think again!!

      1. ch says:

        Yes, it is a TEMPORARY ban to allow for better vetting. Get your head out of your ass and actually read what the ban says. ANY person coming into this country should be properly vetted.

        1. theseer says:

          it should be a permanent ban…america does not need them…and the fbi said there is no way to vet them…no paperwork or database…

          1. ch says:

            I agree, I would like to see immigration stop for everyone for 5 years to allow this country to get back on track. Then we can decide whether we want to take in anyone at that time. It is a privilege to come here, not a right and we need to be selective, not just keep letting them come for freebies for their lives, like the refugees that obama forced on us.

      2. chw2000 says:

        Sounds like you’re the bigot here. If you had half a brain you would know that 80+% of Muslims live in countries not listed in the ban. And, the ban is not permanent, it’s TEMPORARY!

        1. Timothy Raffety says:

          and if she Sharron Freitas loves the damn Muslims so much, she just needs to go live with them in their countries of origin, then tell people how nice they were to her bitch ass.

        2. Sharron Freitas says:

          Make sure you have enough ashes to cover you so we don’t have to listen to all your bigotry. You probably don’t even have ANY offspring to follow in your footsteps.

      3. CrustyOldGeezer says:

        it appears that I have, perhaps, caused a snowflake to begin to melt.

        Oh woe is me I shall go cover myself in ashes and beat myself with a stick to atone for that great sin against humanity.

        I shall go down to the river and cast myself in and drown…..

        WAIT!!!

        Is “sharron” a girls name? A boys name? A “Sexually undetermined as yet” name?

        How do I know that it’s really a snowflake and not some retarded jackass that like to bray at the moon?

        Perhaps it’s just a pig inside the moslem clothing that has been trained to walk on its hind legs?

        I didn’t have female offspring, and I doubt my sons would be interested in swine disguised as a moslem…..

        …. oh no….

        I have probably really upset the snowflakes by now…

        Back to the ash pit to cover myself….

        My work here is done….

    5. Knowledge Transfer says:

      Exactly! We must stop playing nice with premeditated and orchestrated sovereign sabotage and saboteurs.

  • Ramon1710 . says:

    The empty headed self-righteous chick carrying the sign needs to spend a month complying with sharia law in Iran. Perhaps that will give her insight as what constitutes a valid religion, and what constitutes a primitive ideology of conquest.

    1. Tiger says:

      They don’t have the power to override the president and he needs to just do it. They have no power to stop him and Congress can’t Impeach him for it because he is in his rights.

      9e. The Power of the Federal Courts

      Not everyone agrees on how much power the judicial branch should
      have. After all, federal judges and justices are appointed, not elected.
      As most Americans believe in democracy, shouldn’t elected officials run
      the country?

      On the other hand, perhaps American government would be fairer if
      judges had even more power. Because they do not have to worry about
      reelection, they are relieved of the outside pressure of public opinion.

      After all, the majority is not always right. It is no accident that
      the Founders provided for elected officials in the legislature and
      appointed officials in the judiciary. They believed that freedom,
      equality, and justice are best achieved by a balance between the two
      branches of government.

      Checks on Judicial Power

      Although
      the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Cherokee, its decision was not
      enforced. Nearly 4,000 Cherokee died on the Trail of Tears as a result
      of the Indian removals.

      The president and Congress have some control of the judiciary with
      their power to appoint and confirm appointments of judges and justices.
      Congress also may impeach judges (only seven have actually been removed
      from office), alter the organization of the federal court system, and
      amend the Constitution.

      Congress can also get around a court ruling by passing a slightly different law than one previously declared unconstitutional.

      Courts also have limited power to implement the decisions that they
      make. For example, if the president or another member of the executive
      branch chooses to ignore a ruling, there is very little that the federal
      courts can do about it.

      For example, the Supreme Court ruled against the removal of the
      Cherokee from their native lands in 1831. President Andrew Jackson
      disagreed. He proceeded with the removal of the Cherokee, and the
      Supreme Court was powerless to enforce its decision.

      The Power of the Courts

      Will Counts/APThe 1954 Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka
      regarding integration of schools was not enforced until three years
      later, when Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas, was
      integrated. Elizabeth Eckford, one of the first African American
      students to attend Central, was heckled on her way to school each
      morning.

      The federal courts’ most important power is that of judicial review,
      the authority to interpret the Constitution. When federal judges rule
      that laws or government actions violate the spirit of the Constitution,
      they profoundly shape public policy. For example, federal judges have
      declared over 100 federal laws unconstitutional.

      Another measure of the Supreme Court’s power is its ability to overrule itself. In 1954, the Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka that schools segregated by race were unconstitutional. This reversed the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision that upheld the doctrine of “separate but equal.”

      For the most part, though, federal courts do have a great deal of
      respect for previous decisions. A very strong precedent called stare decisis (“let the decision stand”) directs judges to be cautious about overturning decisions made by past courts.

      An act of the legislature repugnant to the Constitution is void…. It
      is emphatically the province of the judicial department to say what the
      law is.John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison (1803)

      Words which, ordinarily and in many places, would be within the freedom
      of speech protected by the First Amendment, may become subject to
      prohibition when of such a nature and used in such circumstances as to
      create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the
      substantive evils which Congress has a right to prevent. The character
      of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done.Oliver Wendell Holmes, Schenck v. the United States (1919)

      The judgments below, except that, in the Delaware case, are accordingly
      reversed, and the cases are remanded to the District Courts to take such
      proceedings and enter such orders and decrees consistent with this
      opinion as are necessary and proper to admit to public schools on a
      racially nondiscriminatory basis with all deliberate speed the parties
      to these cases.Earl Warren, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (1955)

      I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material [pornography] …[B]ut I know it when I see it.Potter Stewart, Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964)

      Charles
      Evans Hughes was first appointed to the Supreme Court in 1910, but left
      the Court to run for president in 1916. He was reappointed to the
      Supreme Court as Chief Justice in 1930.

      Judicial Activism versus Judicial Restraint

      The lack of agreement regarding the policy making power of courts is
      reflected in the debate over judicial activism versus judicial
      restraint. Judicial activists believe that the federal courts must
      correct injustices that are perpetuated or ignored by the other
      branches.

      For example, minority rights have often been ignored partly because
      majorities impose their will on legislators. Prayers in public schools
      support the beliefs of the majority but ignore the rights of the
      minority. The Constitution is often loosely interpreted to meet the
      issues of the present. In the words of former Justice Charles Evans
      Hughes, “We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the
      judges say it is.”

      Supporters of judicial restraint point out that appointed judges are
      immune to public opinion, and if they abandon their role as careful and
      cautious interpreters of the Constitution, they become unelected
      legislators. According to Justice Antonin Scalia, “The Constitution is
      not an empty bottle….It is like a statute, and the meaning doesn’t
      change.”

      Despite the debate over what constitutes the appropriate amount of
      judicial power, the United States federal courts remain the most
      powerful judicial system in world history. Their power is enhanced by
      life terms for judges and justices, and they play a major role in
      promoting the core American values of freedom, equality, and justice.

      QUIZ TIME: The Judicial Branch

      1. Askjrsk says:

        Nazi totalitarian dictatorship of Obamas for eight years, all he needed was a pen and a phone, look at the destruction chaos division massive debt, treason and support of the enemy he did. PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP has so much more workload because of the Obamas fraudulent presidency.

    2. Askjrsk says:

      Brilliant idea. Run at GITMO a Sharia law compound. Six months first offence.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

?>

Keep the Fake News Media in check.

Don’t let the MSM censor your news as America becomes Great Again. Over 500,000 Americans receive our daily dose of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness along with Breaking News direct to their inbox—and you can too. Sign up to receive news and views from The 1776Coalition!

We know how important your privacy is and your information is SAFE with us. We’ll never sell
your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time directly from your inbox.
View our full privacy policy.

Facebook Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com
Google Analytics Alternative