BREAKING: Appeals court denies Trump administration request to reinstate ban

[Confused Democrat]

Thank you founding fathers!

Appeals court denies Trump administration request to immediately reinstate ban on travelers and refugees.

[BlueSwan]

It's gonna be really interesting to witness how Trump deals with this in the upcoming days.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Note that this was only on denying an emergency stay of the stay. The Ninth will still be hearing on an expedited basis whether to revoke the stay.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Note that this was only on denying an emergency stay of the stay. The Ninth will still be hearing on an expedited basis whether to revoke the stay.

Somehow I don't think that the 9th is going to find "because courts don't have any jurisdiction over the Executive" to have merit.

At this point, I almost want to see Gorsuch confirmed quickly, so he can join the rest of the Justices on slapping down Trump's appeal.  (Not that he's not problematic on a lot of issues, but he doesn't seem to have a history of kow-towing to the Executive.)

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Note that this was only on denying an emergency stay of the stay. The Ninth will still be hearing on an expedited basis whether to revoke the stay.

Somehow I don't think that the 9th is going to find "because courts don't have any jurisdiction over the Executive" to have merit.

At this point, I almost want to see Gorsuch confirmed quickly, so he can join the rest of the Justices on slapping down Trump's appeal.  (Not that he's not problematic on a lot of issues, but he doesn't seem to have a history of kow-towing to the Executive.)

I would hope that the actual lawyers who draft the appeal for Trump will be able to make a more cogent argument.  It's not that hard to do better than a tweet.  Still, as you point out Gorsuch has not been a fan of administrative deference

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Note that this was only on denying an emergency stay of the stay. The Ninth will still be hearing on an expedited basis whether to revoke the stay.

Somehow I don't think that the 9th is going to find "because courts don't have any jurisdiction over the Executive" to have merit.

At this point, I almost want to see Gorsuch confirmed quickly, so he can join the rest of the Justices on slapping down Trump's appeal.  (Not that he's not problematic on a lot of issues, but he doesn't seem to have a history of kow-towing to the Executive.)

I would hope that the actual lawyers who draft the appeal for Trump will be able to make a more cogent argument.  It's not that hard to do better than a tweet.  Still, as you point out Gorsuch has not been a fan of administrative deference

It doesn't look like they will. Make a more cogent argument, that is.
http://www.thegazette.com/subject/news/nation-and-world/9th-circuit-court-denies-trump-administrations-bid-to-reinstate-travel-ban-20170205

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And while  it doesn't have any effect on the merits, I doubt that the so-called president's twitter flaming is going to *help* his subordinates' case any. 

[Person Man]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h6oxvm9Q68Q

[The_Doctor]

The Trump Administration should withdraw the executive order, make it more constitutional, and reinstate it, if they want to not look like massive idiots in front of the Supreme Court. I can imagine 4 liberals + Kennedy slapping down Trump.

Or maybe Trump should just back down and withdraw the EO completely, for the sake of the country and hope to repair the hash of things?

[The_Doctor]

I changed my mind. I want Kennedy and the four liberals to slap down Trump while Thomas, Alito, and maybe Gorsuch write a cowering dissent. I don't know where Roberts will come down on this; he'll come down on wherever he thinks history will. Most likely, I can see Roberts going "hmm, history is going to judge us for this. OK then, better slap down the President."*

*Roberts has a precedent for behaving this way. It's the only reason he upheld the ACA. He doesn't want to be the Chief on the wrong side of history, a la Taney.

[PeteB]

Not unexpected but will certainly be "unexpected" for Trump. He just has not had to deal with opposition to his orders like this for years (probably since his father's days).

Let's see his real executive capacity now. If he gets bogged down on this issue, his agenda is dead. Right now, he is still on his honeymoon and it won't be long before he gets some very serious opposition in Congress.

If I was advising him (God forbid), I would tell him to quietly abandon the travel ban and focus on a popular measure with his base instead (like Trade or Obamacare reform). But so far, his ego has ruled his head.

[SteveRogers]

Will Trump acknowledge that these men were in fact judges this time?

[Crumpets]

I agree that I now want to see Gorsuch confirmed and be a part of this case (which I think would pretty clearly lose at SCOTUS), especially if Gorsuch agrees to strike it down. Trump would inevitably try to get him fired, or barring that, immediately fire whoever suggested nominating him.

[The Free North]

I have a sneaking suspicion a good part of Trump's first few months in office are going to be sent listening to people more intelligent than him telling him why he can't do the things he wants to do.

[justfollowingtheelections]

Gorsuch isn't being confirmed.  He will be treated by Democrats the same way that dude Blagojevich picked was treated, and rightfully so.  Trump should be stopped.

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

Gorsuch isn't being confirmed.  He will be treated by Democrats the same way that dude Blagojevich picked was treated, and rightfully so.  Trump should be stopped.

-Gorsuch is too qualified for Dems to come up with the votes to block him. Count on it.

[justfollowingtheelections]

Gorsuch isn't being confirmed.  He will be treated by Democrats the same way that dude Blagojevich picked was treated, and rightfully so.  Trump should be stopped.

-Gorsuch is too qualified for Dems to come up with the votes to block him. Count on it.

So was Garland and that didn't stop Republicans.  We'll see if the Democrats will have the balls to oppose him or if Trump will grab them by the p***y.

[Lexii, harbinger of chaos and sexual anarchy]

Gorsuch isn't being confirmed.  He will be treated by Democrats the same way that dude Blagojevich picked was treated, and rightfully so.  Trump should be stopped.

-Gorsuch is too qualified for Dems to come up with the votes to block him. Count on it.

So was Garland and that didn't stop Republicans.  We'll see if the Democrats will have the balls to oppose him or if Trump will grab them by the p***y.

But the Republicans actually could stop Garland as they had the numbers, and they'll have little problem in using the nuclear option

[EnglishPete]

I changed my mind. I want Kennedy and the four liberals to slap down Trump while Thomas, Alito, and maybe Gorsuch write a cowering dissent. I don't know where Roberts will come down on this; he'll come down on wherever he thinks history will. Most likely, I can see Roberts going "hmm, history is going to judge us for this. OK then, better slap down the President."*

*Roberts has a precedent for behaving this way. It's the only reason he upheld the ACA. He doesn't want to be the Chief on the wrong side of history, a la Taney.

History is written by the winners. If Trump achieves is goals during his presidency history will judge him well, and will judge this action of his well. If he doesn't then it won't.

[GoTfan]

I changed my mind. I want Kennedy and the four liberals to slap down Trump while Thomas, Alito, and maybe Gorsuch write a cowering dissent. I don't know where Roberts will come down on this; he'll come down on wherever he thinks history will. Most likely, I can see Roberts going "hmm, history is going to judge us for this. OK then, better slap down the President."*

*Roberts has a precedent for behaving this way. It's the only reason he upheld the ACA. He doesn't want to be the Chief on the wrong side of history, a la Taney.

History is written by the winners. If Trump achieves is goals during his presidency history will judge him well, and will judge this action of his well. If he doesn't then it won't.

The sheer amount of 'Lost Cause of the South' stuff out there disproves that.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Gorsuch isn't being confirmed.  He will be treated by Democrats the same way that dude Blagojevich picked was treated, and rightfully so.  Trump should be stopped.

-Gorsuch is too qualified for Dems to come up with the votes to block him. Count on it.

Qualifications are irrelevant here, anyone other Garland is unacceptable here.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Gorsuch isn't being confirmed.  He will be treated by Democrats the same way that dude Blagojevich picked was treated, and rightfully so.  Trump should be stopped.

I wish you were right, but I fear Democrats don't have the guts.

[EnglishPete]

I changed my mind. I want Kennedy and the four liberals to slap down Trump while Thomas, Alito, and maybe Gorsuch write a cowering dissent. I don't know where Roberts will come down on this; he'll come down on wherever he thinks history will. Most likely, I can see Roberts going "hmm, history is going to judge us for this. OK then, better slap down the President."*

*Roberts has a precedent for behaving this way. It's the only reason he upheld the ACA. He doesn't want to be the Chief on the wrong side of history, a la Taney.

History is written by the winners. If Trump achieves is goals during his presidency history will judge him well, and will judge this action of his well. If he doesn't then it won't.

The sheer amount of 'Lost Cause of the South' stuff out there disproves that.

History is written by the winners. the South Lost and the North won. That kind of proves my point.

As for the general growth of the ideology of 'free trade/free movement/international integration' progressivism over the last eighty years it reflects the class interests of the dominant class of out time, the bureaucratic class. President Trump, very much unlike both his predecessor and his election opponent, does not come from this class and is not sympathetic to its interests or ideology. As new technology and Artificial Intelligence renders most of this class obsolete and reduces the power of the remainder it will be interesting to see in which direction history moves.

I think that neither the election of Trump nor the Brexit vote would have been possible without new technology enabling people to reject the bureaucratic class in elections in a way not possible before in western countries.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

I have a sneaking suspicion a good part of Trump's first few months in office are going to be sent listening to people more intelligent than him telling him why he can't do the things he wants to do.

And the rest of it will be him ignoring them, firing them, and throwing tantrums at anyone who will listen to him.

[Anna Komnene]

I changed my mind. I want Kennedy and the four liberals to slap down Trump while Thomas, Alito, and maybe Gorsuch write a cowering dissent. I don't know where Roberts will come down on this; he'll come down on wherever he thinks history will. Most likely, I can see Roberts going "hmm, history is going to judge us for this. OK then, better slap down the President."*

*Roberts has a precedent for behaving this way. It's the only reason he upheld the ACA. He doesn't want to be the Chief on the wrong side of history, a la Taney.

History is written by the winners. If Trump achieves is goals during his presidency history will judge him well, and will judge this action of his well. If he doesn't then it won't.

Interesting. Here I thought history was written by academics and historians. Silly me!

[The_Doctor]

I changed my mind. I want Kennedy and the four liberals to slap down Trump while Thomas, Alito, and maybe Gorsuch write a cowering dissent. I don't know where Roberts will come down on this; he'll come down on wherever he thinks history will. Most likely, I can see Roberts going "hmm, history is going to judge us for this. OK then, better slap down the President."*

*Roberts has a precedent for behaving this way. It's the only reason he upheld the ACA. He doesn't want to be the Chief on the wrong side of history, a la Taney.

History is written by the winners. If Trump achieves is goals during his presidency history will judge him well, and will judge this action of his well. If he doesn't then it won't.

Trump doesn't look like a winner right now. We'll see, but his own Senate Leader is breaking with him, his popularity is in the toilet, etc. We'll see if within a year or two, he decides to execute a u-turn to try to cement a more popular legacy, like Arnold Schwarzenegger did in California.

Also, Koretmatsu v. United States, (1944) contradicts your point. The Justices didn't overrule FDR because it was World War II (demonstrating how much a mandate to govern + a world war can give you immense sums of power), but later it was considered one of FDR"s worst transgressions, something even partisan Democrats acknowledge.

History could well judge that this action of Trump fits within the Korematsu pattern, thus declaring that Trump acted egregiously. I personally agree with this sentiment. The people writing history will probably be the millennial generation who voted against Trump en masse, as well as the most diverse generation in history. These people get to write the history and they can easily rewrite a win into a loss.

Trump should bear in mind that for his legacy. So far, if he goes down as a white nationalist President who acted in the interests of a narrow faction in American history, he will look pretty bad.