WE NEED YOUR HELP!
Please donate to keep ReaderRant online to serve political discussion and its members. (Blue Ridge Photography pays the bills for RR).
The blatant, and entirely predictable, ethics violations keep piling up. First it was Trump, and then, quite baldly, Kellyann Conway. Bloomberg. An ethics probe might lead to release of some tax returns. I don't know what mix ignorance and chutzpah leads to this level of ethical chicanery, but it is nearly unprecedented. At least during Teapot Dome they tried to keep it under wraps.
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.
Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.
Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich
Oh God, don't I know it.. But... it's a start. I've determined that the primary criterion for a Trump appointment is the ability to lie with impunity.
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.
Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich
These so-called judges have some nerve putting our great and wonderful President's EO on hold simply because that nice judge in Washington said to do so.
She was warned. She persisted.... and so must we all. H. Clinton.
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.
Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich
I failed to get back to the merits of the "ban" case as it proceeded so rapidly and I've been on the road. I'll try to flesh this post out throughout the day as I can, but here's a Start:
“The exclusion of aliens is a fundamental act of sovereignty … inherent in the executive power,” the Supreme Court said in 1950. And lest there be doubt, Congress adopted a provision in 1952 saying the president “may by proclamation and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens and any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants” whenever he thinks it “would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.”
Quote
Section 1182(f), states: “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate”
.
b) The biggest faults in the ban have been is breadth, unspecificity, and discriminatory intent/structure. Breadth in that it included all immigrants and refugees, regardless of status (including visa and green card holders). Unspecificity, because - even at trial - the administration provided no "rational basis" for its decision, asserting that it had "unreviewable" plenary authority, absent evidence, in the field of immigration. The discriminatory intent is demonstrated by past and concurrent statements, and the structure by exceptions for "religious minorities" (i.e., non-muslims). The general rule is that the government can pass a law/regulation for nearly any reason BUT an impermissible one. Religious discrimination is explicitly impermissible both constitutionally and in the Immigration and Naturalization Act.
Quote
Section 1152(a) of Title 8, U.S. Code, states that (with exceptions not here relevant) “no person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person’s race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence”.
c) Nearly all of the "defects" can be cured with appropriate crafting. Given the overweening hubris of the administration, however, I don't expect them to take that route.
Last edited by NW Ponderer; 02/10/1708:38 PM. Reason: addition of specific provisions
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.
Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich
