Federal judges block Trump's travel ban
 

(CNN)BREAKING NEWS: A federal judge in Maryland has temporarily blocked the 90-day ban on immigration for citizens of six countries in President Donald Trump's executive order.

Although the ban was already restrained nationwide because of a ruling in Hawaii, the Maryland decision is another blow to Trump's executive order.
ORIGINAL STORY: A federal judge in Hawaii blocked President Donald Trump's new travel ban on Wednesday afternoon, hours before the ban was set to go into effect.
In a 43-page ruling, US District Court Judge Derrick Watson concluded in no uncertain terms that the new executive order failed to pass legal muster at this stage and the state had established "a strong likelihood of success" on their claims of religious discrimination.
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/15/po...l-ban-blocked/

Wait for the toys coming out of the pram now... :joker:

Meanwhile, all the other countries who have simiar bans in place, continue unopposed.

Would they be in the 'free world' or not?

Such as?

Japan for one.

You've used this argument multiple times, it's foolishness to compare what was an isolationist country for many years to a country that was purportedly built on freedom.

Like I've said before in response to this flawed argument, it'd be like trying to take focus off Trump's abuses of power by saying 'well, Kim Jong Il is way worse but no one is talking about HIM!'.

I am using a comparison for the sake of debate, Dezzy. You're not in any position to tell me what is a flawed argument and what is not, bearing in mind the tone of your posts.

I will not be replying to you again.

'I'm taking the ball and I'm going HOME!'

It's a flawed comparison for reasons I've stated. If a western country with as much influence as the US did similar things then you'd have a valid comparison otherwise it's just a really terrible example to try and normalise what is a worrying development for a 'free' country.

Maybe the west is trying to de-westernise themselves to be more like other governments, what other reason could there be for the regressive lurch?

Its not flawed at all, it is 100% valid

You can't compare the US which is a country that was built on the idea of freedom of rights for all and is now sliding towards totalitarianism under Trump to Japan which was built on being isolationist until fairly recently in historical terms but is becoming more progressive as time goes on. It's foolish to compare a country like the US which is sliding backwards to a country like Japan that is making progress.

For comparisons to work there needs to be similarities, like I said before, if you can offer a highly influential Western country that is sliding backwards like the US but it's being ignored in favour of the US then by all means, go ahead.

This is what is great about true democracy, you are held to account.
Be it the opposition or your own party members, keeps it more sane.

yes indeed

For now. Trump's working on that. So are the Tories.

Smart words.

What ball? :shrug:

Yes of course you can. You just choose what youre getting "outraged" about to fit your own agaends, but you clearly do not apply your beliefs universally.

:thumbs:

So basically a free pass to the majority of the world to act how they want unless it's the US or UK.
Sounds just like something the 'Stop The War Coalition' would spout.

Are the Uk and US the only Western countries now? :idc:

And Ireland obvs:flowers:

Not the other foreign countries though.They can't even speak English

[emoji23]

The comparison makes no sense, for a comparison to work there has to be shared ground between the two examples. The US' situation and status is completely different to that of Japan's and, like I said before, Japan is improving, the US is sliding back. To excuse Trump by saying 'look at Japan' is pretty much like fat shaming an overweight person when they're at the gym.

It's a **** comparison to make for reasons I've stated before (and have yet to be contested).

Outrage? Who's outraged?

You've yet to provide a reason why they are comparable so I'll assume you've got nothing useful to say on the matter.

My god, how embarrassing for him.

Being taught the law by the people he's supposed to be governing. Dickhead.

You choose what you're outraged about to fit your own a-gender.




GEDDIT?

:joker::joker::joker:

Who knew, after ranting for 18 months about a Muslim ban...Trump can't quite convince the courts that his travel ban is anything other than a religious ban.

That's part of the problem - people should be talking about the likes of him.

At this rate we won't have a 'free world'.

What is the point of being a president when you cant even put in place laws that you think best for your country, I am no expert on the subject,but what is so wrong with him wanting to be careful who enters his country especially in an age where you cant really trust anyone, Can you imagine another 9/11 when people would then be thinking why let these people in,I am no Trump fan but I do see that the constant backlash is a tad over the top,let him do his job,if he messes up that will be his fault and he will be out,the press /media etc need to calm down,it is them instilling fear into people by printing hearsay and fabrications,you get checked going through airports but any Tom,Dick and harry can enter the country.

If it were another 9/11 they wouldn't have the border control issue would they that's the point of a hijack.
Presidents don't like PMs have autocracy, or they shouldn't it's not how a democracy works .

neo liberals have taken over the assylum

Imo the ban is a step too far.I think heavy vetting is appropriate though.
However.He is fulfilling his election promises and it is what America voted for so if it's what the US democratic process has decided then that it what should happen.

Why bother with a hijack if you can just walk-in. The easiest method has to be the best from the point of view of potential terrorists.

Instead of calling another mass terrorist attack on American soil another 9/11 it would simply be called something else such as easy peasy 2018 . We need to be reducing the chances of such attacks not making it easier.

He can say what he likes prior to the election, once elected like every other elected leader he is bound by the constitution.
Again, that's how democracy works.

Democracy is a word often used when it suits. Plenty of remainers would have ignored and overturned Brexit if they had been give the chance.

My point was.. with 9/11 there was no issue of border control as the plane never has to land does it?
Think of the number of planes that come into US airspace from Muslim countries daily.

It's not a word, it's just how we are governed, your opinions on those who voted remain are irrelevant.