SCOTUS rules on Travel Ban

[jj22]

(06-27-2018, 11:43 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: 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.

My argument is I don't mind the ban if it makes us safer. Not stopping those who come in to our country from those countries that have attacked us seems counterproductive. That's my only point. ISIS has taken responsibility for random acts against us mostly by AMERICANS who may sympathize with them in some cases, and in most they are just claiming responsibility after the fact, but had nothing to do with the planning or supporting of these attackers from within.

I support a ban against immigration from those countries that have attacked us. You are advocating more bans since you are trying to prevent an attack, which means everyone should be banned. Because you never know.