Appeals court cites Trump tweets in ruling against travel ban

[babylonsister]

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/337442-appeals-court-cites-trumps-tweets-in-ruling-against-travel-ban

Appeals court cites Trump tweets in ruling against travel ban
By Rebecca Savransky - 06/12/17 01:49 PM EDT


The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday cited a tweet from President Trump in its ruling against the president's travel ban.

The court cited a tweet from earlier this month, in which Trump talked about the necessity of a "travel ban" in the wake of the attack in London.


"That's right, we need a TRAVEL BAN for certain DANGEROUS countries, not some politically correct term that won't help us protect our people!" the president tweeted on June 5.


The president sent out a series of other tweets after the London attack renewing his calls for his travel ban and arguing the order is necessary to keep the country safe.

At the time, George Conway, the husband of White House counselor Kellyanne Conway and a former candidate for a high-ranking Justice Department position, warned on his own Twitter account that Trump's tweets were counterproductive and could be used against him in court.

The Monday appeals court decision delivered another blow to the administration as it waits for the Supreme Court to decide whether to intervene.

The California-based court affirmed in large part the Hawaii district court ruling that blocked the temporary ban on nationals from six majority-Muslim countries from entering the U.S.

In a unanimous ruling, a three-judge panel on the court said Trump's order does not offer a sufficient justification to suspend the entry of more than 180 million people on the basis of nationality.

[Eliot Rosewater]

1. Enjoy this justice while you can, staying home on election day or voting 3rd party

means these courts will have EXTREMIST rightwing SYCOPHANT constitution HATERS on the courts very soon.

EVERYTHING is gone at that point.

[MiniMe]

2. Wasn't the travel ban that he wanted to put in place for 3 months? And wasn't that 4 months ago?

[Ms. Toad]

4. Yup. Theoretically so that they had 90 days

to prevent harm until they could get a vetting process into place.

So by now, their vetting process is in place and the question before the Supreme Court is moot. (That's the argument the challengers should make, anyway.)

[Quixote1818]

3. Alan Dershowitz wrong again LOL!

[gratuitous]

5. President Trump has himself said he is like a smart person

I guess the similarities to a smart person end before Trump exhibits any actual knowledge, understanding, or ability to learn.