Supremes Back Trump Asylum Restrictions... - Survivalist Forum
Survivalist Forum

Advertise Here

Go Back   Survivalist Forum > >
Articles Classifieds Donations Gallery Groups Links Store Survival Files


Notices

Advertise Here
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-12-2019, 09:13 AM
PeterEnergy's Avatar
PeterEnergy PeterEnergy is online now
Rom 14:1, 13; Jam 4:11-12
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 15,810
Thanks: 11,145
Thanked 29,095 Times in 10,190 Posts
Default Supremes Back Trump Asylum Restrictions...



Advertise Here

The focus I want to bring is not of the rational majority but the tyrannical leanings of the minority, Sotomayor dissents: Trump asylum ban comes when stakes 'could not be higher'. Excerpts:
"Once again the Executive Branch has issued a rule that seeks to upend longstanding practices regarding refugees who seek shelter from persecution," she wrote.
"Upending longstanding practices" is what elections and the political process is for! With this rational, it is not possible to make slavery illegal. How about gay marriage? Or that 1973 decision? Clearly, the moral standard of decision making blows in the wind of the minds of our superiors in the judiciary!

Clearly, Sotomayor aims to leverage a tyrannical judiciary, under the color of legal process, as a substitute for the political process. A chilling effect on the political process is subordinating it to a judicial process. Prop. 8 overturned in California, court says state canít ban gay marriage
  • Do away with elections
  • Do away with legislatures
One could argue that every single presidential election comes down to a basic question for the electorate; should we continue longstanding practices of government or upend them? This is the peaceful alternative our Founding Father's gave us to war; voting.

Obama said elections have consequences. To the mind of the Sotomayor's of the world, it's all about respecting 'longstanding practices,' in the case of Southern invasion, or new practices approved by our superiors in the judiciary, in the case of gay marriage.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to PeterEnergy For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2019, 09:20 AM
Jack Swilling's Avatar
Jack Swilling Jack Swilling is online now
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Ozarks
Posts: 2,719
Thanks: 4,153
Thanked 6,102 Times in 1,944 Posts
Default

It is simple Constitutional law issue
Trump will always win on these issues
Like the ban on immigration from wherever
Simple issue
Even some liberal SCOTUS justices get on board
Quick reply to this message
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Jack Swilling For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2019, 09:36 AM
PeterEnergy's Avatar
PeterEnergy PeterEnergy is online now
Rom 14:1, 13; Jam 4:11-12
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 15,810
Thanks: 11,145
Thanked 29,095 Times in 10,190 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Swilling View Post
It is simple Constitutional law issue
NOTE: Sotomayor did not even reference the Constitution.

I see parallels between this and our religious discussions. The Courts looks on its own traditions as equal to and even superior to the sacred document of the Constitution. They make up their own standard to rule as they go.

This arbitrary decision making is the devils playground.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to PeterEnergy For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2019, 09:37 AM
Snuggle Monkey's Avatar
Snuggle Monkey Snuggle Monkey is online now
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Somewhere between the sacred silence & sleep
Posts: 3,583
Thanks: 10,696
Thanked 7,337 Times in 2,452 Posts
Default

She needs to be asked on national television what her opinion is concerning the "long standing practices" of our right to keep & bear arms.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to Snuggle Monkey For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2019, 09:52 AM
PeterEnergy's Avatar
PeterEnergy PeterEnergy is online now
Rom 14:1, 13; Jam 4:11-12
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 15,810
Thanks: 11,145
Thanked 29,095 Times in 10,190 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snuggle Monkey View Post
She needs to be asked on national television what her opinion is concerning the "long standing practices" of our right to keep & bear arms.
That's overcome by peoples right to now feel safe.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to PeterEnergy For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2019, 09:56 AM
Tyrone's Avatar
Tyrone Tyrone is offline
Hunter
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Oklahoma by way of Texas
Posts: 1,694
Thanks: 1,780
Thanked 2,800 Times in 885 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterEnergy View Post
That's overcome by peoples right to now feel safe.
But I feel safer with a firearm. So thatís my right. Right?
Quick reply to this message
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Tyrone For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2019, 11:07 AM
Jdog67's Avatar
Jdog67 Jdog67 is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Tampa Bay area, Florida
Posts: 3,043
Thanks: 680
Thanked 11,830 Times in 2,394 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterEnergy View Post
"Once again the Executive Branch has issued a rule that seeks to upend longstanding practices
Of course, when Obama illegally changed federal law with his DACA order, that was just fine...
Quick reply to this message
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Jdog67 For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2019, 12:13 PM
Sky1950's Avatar
Sky1950 Sky1950 is offline
Dios y Tejas
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Texas
Age: 69
Posts: 5,996
Thanks: 35,405
Thanked 17,520 Times in 4,686 Posts
Default

he needs to tackle anchor babies next
Quick reply to this message
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Sky1950 For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2019, 01:51 PM
PeterEnergy's Avatar
PeterEnergy PeterEnergy is online now
Rom 14:1, 13; Jam 4:11-12
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 15,810
Thanks: 11,145
Thanked 29,095 Times in 10,190 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sky1950 View Post
he needs to tackle anchor babies next
I totally see that as a 2nd term agenda item.
Quick reply to this message
Old 09-12-2019, 01:58 PM
phil74501 phil74501 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 192
Thanks: 12
Thanked 432 Times in 146 Posts
Default

I'm surprised, hell down right shocked, that two of the lefties actually sided with Trump. That's like a sign of the apocalypse.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to phil74501 For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2019, 01:59 PM
leadcounsel's Avatar
leadcounsel leadcounsel is offline
Comic, not your lawyer!
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 10,297
Thanks: 23,549
Thanked 31,691 Times in 7,676 Posts
Default

Yet the irony these leftists don't see is that they ROUTINELY seek to upend "longstanding practices." Want examples?

*Traditional marriage - since basically the dawn of civilization and fairly uniform across all cultures

*Traditional gender roles - since mankind existed and fairly uniform across all cultures

*National borders - since nations existed, and fairly uniform across all nations which all have borders which are secured to some extent.

* Free speech, recognized and protected under the 1A, for a couple few centuries. Routinely threatened now by the left.

* Gun rights, recognized and protected under the 2A for a couple centuries, routinely threatened by the left.

* Due process, recognized and protected by the 4/5/6/8 for centuries, now routinely threatened by the left.

And so forth.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to leadcounsel For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2019, 04:32 PM
PeterEnergy's Avatar
PeterEnergy PeterEnergy is online now
Rom 14:1, 13; Jam 4:11-12
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 15,810
Thanks: 11,145
Thanked 29,095 Times in 10,190 Posts
Default

More on the same theme. How John Roberts killed the census citizenship question
Roberts began to waver. He began to believe that Ross' rationale for the citizenship question had been invented, and that, despite the deference he would normally give an executive branch official, Ross' claim had to matter in the court's final judgment, which Roberts announced on June 27.
Rationale for the citizenship question is a political question, not legal. The court is acting as a super-legislature.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to PeterEnergy For This Useful Post:
Reply

Bookmarks



Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Survivalist Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Gender
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Kevin Felts 2006 - 2015,
Green theme by http://www.themesbydesign.net