SCOTUS rules on Travel Ban

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(06-27-2018, 11:12 AM)jj22 Wrote: The argument that they haven't had anyone attack us on our soil.  And if this was about making America safer, or those with state sponsored terrorism, then what is the purpose if those countries that have attacked us, and sponsor terrorist, are exempt. That's the clearest I can say it. I understand there are those that disagree. But I stand by it.

ISIS has attacked us on our own soil, by their own admission and by that of the attackers.  So, by your own standards, Syria should absolutely be included on this list.  Also, I don't think waiting for an attack to take place on US soil is a good standard for inclusion on such a list.  Waiting for Americans to be killed before taking action seems like bad policy to me in a general sense.  Honestly, you argument sounds more like you're advocating for more countries to be included than against the efficacy of the current ban.