02-10-2017, 01:09 PM
(02-10-2017, 11:18 AM)michaelsean Wrote: I'm a little confused. I thought the President has the right to impose travel bans from certain countries. To me the people who already have Visas is a different story. Matt are you saying that they aren't saying the ban is illegal, only that the lower court had the right to temporarily halt it while it is reviewed?
(02-10-2017, 11:32 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: That's what I have been reading. The court hasn't made a judgement on the constitutionality of the order, just that the court has the authority to put a hold on the order while it is reviewed and the administration hasn't provided enough evidence that there is a threat to national security if this order is halted in the meantime.
Pat beat me to it, but yes. The district court never ruled on the legality of the order, they only put a hold on its implementation while it is being reviewed. The DoJ then appealed the halt on the order to the circuit court and that was what their ruling was on. The halts put in place are temporary measures until the overall matter is resolved in the courts, which will take a much longer time. The DoJ, on behalf of the Trump administration, is just trying to claim that the threat to national security is so great by halting the implementation that it should not be done. As of yet, they have been unable to make that argument satisfactorily.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
