Immigration Ban

I posted this in the Trump thread but it seems more appropriate here:

I think we can all agree Trumps executive order with the ban was a poorly thought out mess. 

It is my ignorant understanding that Trump's orders were valid.  If they weren't, then I wonder whether all the past orders were also violations and what it means for future presidents.  I'm not sure that the district courts are unbiased.  Shit the Supreme Court has it's own biases (which is one of the big reasons Trump was elected). 

What stops Trump from issuing a similar order that's more well thought out?

Whether the ban is allowed or not, Trump made the effort that his supporters wanted.  Hopefully, this will be a learning lesson for the future of his presidency that he can't just rush stuff out without giving it adequate consideration.  (I said hopefully, not likely, hopefully). 

Trump wanted 6 months while he puts together a better vetting program.  Let's see if that was his true intent and we see some stricter protocols within the next 5.5 months. All they have to be is something slightly better than what we have now.  I have a feeling that one of the following will happen: either nothing is proposed or something way to extreme is proposed. 
 
spootieho said:
It is my ignorant understanding that Trump's orders were valid. 
Click to expand...

The administration is trying to argue that the president has the ultimate authority in any decisions made to "protect the national security" and as such any EO with this in mind would be unreviewable by the judiciary. If this is not an autocratic position then what is?
 
spootieho said:
Can Trump issue a similar (but different) order that's much more well thought out?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure he can. He can even do it the old fashioned way and go through Congress and get help from security advisors, cabinet members, and people who actually have a clue about what they're doing.
 
Loco_local said:
spootieho said:
Can Trump issue a similar (but different) order that's much more well thought out?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure he can. He can even do it the old fashioned way and go through Congress and get help from security advisors, cabinet members, and people who actually have a clue about what they're doing.
Click to expand...
Sure, but this is something that actually seems better suited for an executive order than something Congress would decide on.
 
spootieho said:
Loco_local said:
spootieho said:
Can Trump issue a similar (but different) order that's much more well thought out?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure he can. He can even do it the old fashioned way and go through Congress and get help from security advisors, cabinet members, and people who actually have a clue about what they're doing.
Click to expand...
Sure, but this is something that actually seems better suited for an executive order than something Congress would decide on.
Click to expand...

The biggest flaw was roping in permanent residents into it. If they had put a halt to any new visas being issued (pending a complete review of the vetting process), it would not have been nearly as controversial. 
 
I'm still shocked at the number of people who think its acceptable for permanent residents (people who have lived and worked in the US for years or decades) being barred from returning home from vacation just because the president felt like it.  No input from homeland security, the state department, members of congress, the intelligence community.  Just on advice from his two nutcase advisors. And I'm being kind by calling them nutcases.
 
Loco_local said:
I'm still shocked at the number of people who think its acceptable for permanent residents (people who have lived and worked in the US for years or decades) being barred from returning home from vacation just because the president felt like it.  No input from homeland security, the state department, members of congress, the intelligence community.  Just on advice from his two nutcase advisors. And I'm being kind by calling them nutcases.
Click to expand...
Have you taken a poll?
 
Nope. I'm basing it on comments here, facebook and twitter. Thankfully I don't know too many people in real life who agreed with the executive order.
 
Are you actually being honest with yourself and with us?

I HATE using this term, but it sounds a bit like you are hitting strawman territory here.

A lot of people who support the ban don't support it in it's entirety.  How many people here support exactly what you wrote?
 
spootieho said:
Are you actually being honest with yourself and with us?

I HATE using this term, but it sounds a bit like you are hitting strawman territory here.

A lot of people who support the ban don't support it in it's entirety.  How many people here support exactly what you wrote?
Click to expand...

Were Trump's language campaigning not so extreme - "Muslim ban" - and this order not so haphazardly assembled, the scrutiny might not be so great (however the scrutiny can be characterized).  In other words, most people support "extreme vetting." It's what Obama's admin was already doing...
 
spootieho said:
Are you actually being honest with yourself and with us?

I HATE using this term, but it sounds a bit like you are hitting strawman territory here.

A lot of people who support the ban don't support it in it's entirety.  How many people here support exactly what you wrote?
Click to expand...

If you agreed with the executive order, you agreed with all of it. You don't get to pick and choose which part of a law you like.
 
spootieho said:
Are you actually being honest with yourself and with us?

I HATE using this term, but it sounds a bit like you are hitting strawman territory here.

A lot of people who support the ban don't support it in it's entirety.  How many people here support exactly what you wrote?
Click to expand...

Even if people don't support it in its entirety, they don't go as far as disapproving of it. The approval rate when it got announced was something like 55% (and only 38% disapproval). Among Republicans the approval rate was > 80%. In recent days the numbers have shifted a bit, but not drastically.
 
Perspective said:
Were Trump's language campaigning not so extreme
Click to expand...
No, because people like you dishonestly took things like that way out of context for the purpose of spreading hate in America while trying to get your team's candidate elected. 
 
Loco_local said:
If you agreed with the executive order, you agreed with all of it. You don't get to pick and choose which part of a law you like.
Click to expand...
No, that's a logical fallacy.  There's room for gray areas.  What you are doing is DISHONEST.  You are misrepresenting situations.

Also, were they not they working on and already fixing a lot of those problems?
 
spootieho said:
Perspective said:
Were Trump's language campaigning not so extreme
Click to expand...
No, because people like you dishonestly took things like that way out of context for the purpose of spreading hate in America while trying to get your team's candidate elected.
Click to expand...

Opposing a Muslim ban is "spreading hate"? Hmm, is that like, reporting facts is "fake news"?
 
spootieho said:
Loco_local said:
If you agreed with the executive order, you agreed with all of it. You don't get to pick and choose which part of a law you like.
Click to expand...
No, that's a logical fallacy.  There's room for gray areas.  What you are doing is DISHONEST.  You are misrepresenting situations.

Also, were they not they working on and already fixing a lot of those problems?
Click to expand...

They could have rescinded it and issues another EO to fix the contentious scenarios, but since our new president is infallible it did not happen. Best they did was issue a legal memorandum that in meaningless (since it does not supersede an executive order from the president). Nothing has been "fixed" other than the confusion that existed among all the impacted agencies and the TRO allowing nationals from those countries to return home.


 
peppy said:
spootieho said:
Loco_local said:
If you agreed with the executive order, you agreed with all of it. You don't get to pick and choose which part of a law you like.
Click to expand...
No, that's a logical fallacy.  There's room for gray areas.  What you are doing is DISHONEST.  You are misrepresenting situations.

Also, were they not they working on and already fixing a lot of those problems?
Click to expand...

They could have rescinded it and issues another EO to fix the contentious scenarios, but since our new president is infallible it did not happen.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with your remark here, and I think it's one of the worst traits of this current admin.  Unfortunately, that strategy can be pretty effective, to the point where you can get elected president.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top