Federal Judge HALTS new travel ban nationwide

[Devout Centrist]

This should ruling should be overturned , I disagree with the order but it is not even close to being unconstitutional and the fact that this happened proves that judges have become way too political .This ban does not apply to people who have green cards, or already have visas, it just applies to future visas. Secondly it doesnt have any religious exceptions which means it does not violate the establishment clause.

Judges are ONLY supposed to look at the written language of a law or executive order not intent or campaign speeches by person who signed it.

That doesn't violate the Nat'l Origin part of the 1965 Immigration Act?

[Devout Centrist]

Its so obviously not a Muslim ban it's painful to watch hacks try and tell me that it is.  It might be stupid, but it aint a Muslim ban!

It's a national origin ban. It still violates the 1965 law.

[Devout Centrist]

Its so obviously not a Muslim ban it's painful to watch hacks try and tell me that it is.  It might be stupid, but it aint a Muslim ban!

It's a national origin ban. It still violates the 1965 law.

It's only temporarily which means its still valid 

The law doesn't specifically allow for that. Besides, a temporary ban could be extended on multiple occasions if that were the case, meaning the distinction would render the law meaningless.

[Devout Centrist]

We'll have to await the conclusion of the review process before we can celebrate anything, but things are certainly looking good. Whether or not this truly amounts to a "Muslim ban" is debatable, but Trump didn't help his case by campaigning on the promise of a Muslim ban. Now any proposal to limit travel or migration from a Muslim majority nation will be immediately viewed as a ban on persons of the Islamic faith, which is exactly the perception the courts and American public should maintain.

Absolutely not , unless it has religious exemptions the order is not a religious ban and it should not be overturned.

The intended target of the ban is implicit in the law by its application solely to Muslim-majority countries. If this ban was truly intended to target countries that are exporters of alleged terrorists, then why does it not even include Saudi Arabia - the home of numerically and proportionally more terrorists than any other? If we cannot trust the law to include the country most responsible for terrorism, including those responsible for the 9/11 attacks, then how can we trust that it's stated purpose is its actual objective?

judges are only supposed to look at letter of the order not perceived intent .

And it's quite clear this violates the 1965 law.

The President has large majorities, if he wants a travel ban, he can make a law. This didn't work with Obama and it won't work now.

[Devout Centrist]

Its so obviously not a Muslim ban it's painful to watch hacks try and tell me that it is.  It might be stupid, but it aint a Muslim ban!

It's a national origin ban. It still violates the 1965 law.

1965 is irrelevant. The laws signed in 1965 did more damage to our country than we can imagine. Slowly but surely, we will start to unwind them but it takes time.

Rule of law doesn't matter to you people I guess.

Pass a law if you care that much. Then it's legal.