Trump wants to lose in the Supreme Court

[Middle-aged Europe]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://us.cnn.com/2017/06/05/politics/trump-travel-ban-courts/index.html

He's probably already planning to run against "the establishment" in the judicial branch in 2018 and 2020.

[President Johnson]

I'm not sure. Maybe you're right because that energizes his base. But actually he doesn't like losing. He always wants to win, and win big league.

[Brittain33]

Trump has no idea that saying his ban is a ban hurts his case in the Supreme Court. He's pure id on this issue.

[KingSweden]

Trump has no idea that saying his ban is a ban hurts his case in the Supreme Court. He's pure id on this issue.

A solid take

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

I'm not sure. Maybe you're right because that energizes his base. But actually he doesn't like losing. He always wants to win, and win big league.

And a major terror attack by Islamic radicals (say, funded by Saudi Arabia, again) *after* the Supreme Court strikes down his ban would be a win for the dictator he longs to be.

[Matty]

It is not proper, legally, to judge a law based on words of people who made it rather than on the actual words of the law.

It's actually unprecedented. Judges judge based on the wording of the law, nothing more and nothing less.

The words out of a mouth have no place in a supreme court hearing.

[Beet]

Trump doesn't care. He's not calculating, and that's what people like about him. Americans like presidents who tell it like it is. Besides, the Supreme Court responds to political pressure. Justices are reading the headlines. They know they aren't just jurists in robes, but politicians too.

[ApatheticAustrian]

Kellyanne's huband has called out Trump about his stupid handling of this situation.

[#gravelgang #lessiglad]

It is not proper, legally, to judge a law based on words of people who made it rather than on the actual words of the law.

It's actually unprecedented. Judges judge based on the wording of the law, nothing more and nothing less.

The words out of a mouth have no place in a supreme court hearing.

All due respect, this is not true. Judges often look to legislative history and statements made by legislators in determining constitutionality of statutes. This is generally done in cases where the plain language is ambiguous. It's fair to argue whether legislative history or other extrinsic statutory aids should be used, as Justice Scalia argued. However it isn't true to claim that judges only judge on the plain language.

[SteveRogers]

It is not proper, legally, to judge a law based on words of people who made it rather than on the actual words of the law.

It's actually unprecedented. Judges judge based on the wording of the law, nothing more and nothing less.

The words out of a mouth have no place in a supreme court hearing.

There is ample precedent for striking down facially neutral laws when there is both a disparate impact and strong extrinsic evidence of discriminatory intent.

[Hammy]

It is not proper, legally, to judge a law based on words of people who made it rather than on the actual words of the law.

It's actually unprecedented. Judges judge based on the wording of the law, nothing more and nothing less.

The words out of a mouth have no place in a supreme court hearing.

You're completely unaware of this thing called motive, aren't you?

[TheSaint250]

I don't see how this would screw him over.  It's literally a temporary ban.  That's been the same.  This PC thing also has nothing to do with this.  You focus on how something is written, not what someone says.  Besides, he's not saying BAN ALL MUSLIMS!!!!!!!

That's not happening and won't happen.

[MasterJedi]

I don't see how this would screw him over.  It's literally a temporary ban.  That's been the same.  This PC thing also has nothing to do with this.  You focus on how something is written, not what someone says.  Besides, he's not saying BAN ALL MUSLIMS!!!!!!!

That's not happening and won't happen.

They wanted a 90 day ban (lol, they wanted it perm) to beef up procedures, security etc. Can easily make an argument that they should have already done everything and that it shouldn't be needed now anyways...

[krazen1211]

I don't see how this would screw him over.  It's literally a temporary ban.  That's been the same.  This PC thing also has nothing to do with this.  You focus on how something is written, not what someone says.  Besides, he's not saying BAN ALL MUSLIMS!!!!!!!

That's not happening and won't happen.

They wanted a 90 day ban (lol, they wanted it perm) to beef up procedures, security etc. Can easily make an argument that they should have already done everything and that it shouldn't be needed now anyways...

Out of control 9th circuit judges blocked that. Time for the Gorsuch smackdown!

[KingSweden]

I don't see how this would screw him over.  It's literally a temporary ban.  That's been the same.  This PC thing also has nothing to do with this.  You focus on how something is written, not what someone says.  Besides, he's not saying BAN ALL MUSLIMS!!!!!!!

That's not happening and won't happen.

They wanted a 90 day ban (lol, they wanted it perm) to beef up procedures, security etc. Can easily make an argument that they should have already done everything and that it shouldn't be needed now anyways...

Agreed. Don't see how the absence of a temporary ban precludes instituting new security/beefed procedures

[Middle-aged Europe]

I don't see how this would screw him over.  It's literally a temporary ban.  That's been the same.  This PC thing also has nothing to do with this.  You focus on how something is written, not what someone says.  Besides, he's not saying BAN ALL MUSLIMS!!!!!!!

That's not happening and won't happen.

They wanted a 90 day ban (lol, they wanted it perm) to beef up procedures, security etc. Can easily make an argument that they should have already done everything and that it shouldn't be needed now anyways...

Like with many other things, Donald Trump simply seems to be incapable of letting it go, even if it makes him look stupid. He isn't smart enough to pick his battles, he wants and needs to win them all.