Re: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court
No, it’s not necessarily visas for the pundit program that is so worrying. That program is much reduced and static at around 29 pundits now. Those pundit visas can be figured out through the consulates with enough money staked for each pundit. The M. Vedic City pundit program of that part of the TM movement at that level is hoping more for its financial existence, more than just worrying about visas. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony...@yahoo.com> wrote : Actually the worry is for the student visas that have been the lifeblood of the institution, visas for students at the meditating University. This term just starting with new incoming 'com-pro' students has a much reduced class size, “..trouble with getting visas”. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.ma...@yahoo.com> wrote : Those pundit program meditators here on H1-B visas or trying to get in on such a visa (or did the TMO stop that program?) may be at risk... ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote : Have any meditators been deported by this exec action? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.mae50@...> wrote : Maybe you should read the 1965 law that clearly doesn't give the President the authority to do what he did. And certainly one reason he'd lose at the Supreme Court level. There would be no tie; he would lose. He's lost twice so far. And he knows it. So, he has to rewrite to save face, or double down and waste millions of dollars and his political capital losing. He's not going to take that risk with this particular Executive Order. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?_r=0 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?_r=0 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote : Trumps nominee will not be seated for months. The latest I've heard is that he plans to re-write the Executive Order because while taking it to the SC, there is a chance that it could end up in a tie, leaving the 9th Circus Court of Appeals decision to stand. So, it's just easier to re-write the order addressing the court's *concerns*. Actually, it's the 9th Circus that is *testing* the constitution. Maybe you should read the 1952 statute that clearly gives the President the authority to do what he did. A bill is currently being drafted in Congress to break-up the 9th Circus into two or more circuits. From: "jr_esq@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 10:32 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court The Appeals Court refused to uphold Trump's travel ban. But he wants to fight it at the highest court in the land. So, the fight goes on. Meanwhile, the nation is divided and in turmoil. Trump is gambling that his recent nominee will cast the winning vote for his travel ban. He is testing the Constitution to the limit. Who will win? https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html?soc_src=mail_trk=ma
Re: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court
Amen. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <jr_esq@...> wrote : Most probably, Trump is playing up his role as the "good" guy for his voters. Even if he loses in the court, he will be telling his voters that he tried to fight the "media, Mexicans, Muslims and other immigrants." You know what? I think he enjoys being the controversial guy. The only way to get him out is to impeach him. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.mae50@...> wrote : Unfortunately John, most Trump supporters would claim that while there might be a law, nothing the New York Times writes is the truth, so therefore the law doesn't apply. Do you see what is wrong with that sentence? Here is a poll of Trump supporters from FFL2. We don't know anything about the sample polled, but still, the poll reflects how many think. Trump supporters don't think he looks foolish; they think he's just being Trumpish and anti-establishment. http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_ppp_poll_trump_voters.jpg http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_ppp_poll_trump_voters.jpg http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_ppp_poll_trump_voters.jpg http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_ppp_poll_trump_vot... http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_ppp_poll_trump_voters.jpg View on www.motherjones.com http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_ppp_poll_trump_voters.jpg Preview by Yahoo ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <jr_esq@...> wrote : Emily, Good research and we can't argue with this point. It shows that Trump didn't do his research before writing the executive order. He even looks more foolish after the decision from the appeals court and considering this law. He should have better advisers in his staff who can guide him to follow the American laws. After this fiasco, he should be more careful in shooting his mouth off without legal justification. Also, someone should do more research to torpedo his idea of building the Wall. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.mae50@...> wrote : Maybe you should read the 1965 law that clearly doesn't give the President the authority to do what he did. And certainly one reason he'd lose at the Supreme Court level. There would be no tie; he would lose. He's lost twice so far. And he knows it. So, he has to rewrite to save face, or double down and waste millions of dollars and his political capital losing. He's not going to take that risk with this particular Executive Order. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?_r=0 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?_r=0 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote : Trumps nominee will not be seated for months. The latest I've heard is that he plans to re-write the Executive Order because while taking it to the SC, there is a chance that it could end up in a tie, leaving the 9th Circus Court of Appeals decision to stand. So, it's just easier to re-write the order addressing the court's *concerns*. Actually, it's the 9th Circus that is *testing* the constitution. Maybe you should read the 1952 statute that clearly gives the President the authority to do what he did. A bill is currently being drafted in Congress to break-up the 9th Circus into two or more circuits. From: "jr_esq@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 10:32 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court The Appeals Court refused to uphold Trump's travel ban. But he wants to fight it at the highest court in the land. So, the fight goes on. Meanwhile, the nation is divided and in turmoil. Trump is gambling that his recent nominee will cast the winning vote for his travel ban. He is testing the Constitution to the limit. Who will win? https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html?soc_src=mail_trk=ma
Re: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court
Most probably, Trump is playing up his role as the "good" guy for his voters. Even if he loses in the court, he will be telling his voters that he tried to fight the "media, Mexicans, Muslims and other immigrants." You know what? I think he enjoys being the controversial guy. The only way to get him out is to impeach him. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.mae50@...> wrote : Unfortunately John, most Trump supporters would claim that while there might be a law, nothing the New York Times writes is the truth, so therefore the law doesn't apply. Do you see what is wrong with that sentence? Here is a poll of Trump supporters from FFL2. We don't know anything about the sample polled, but still, the poll reflects how many think. Trump supporters don't think he looks foolish; they think he's just being Trumpish and anti-establishment. http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_ppp_poll_trump_voters.jpg http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_ppp_poll_trump_voters.jpg http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_ppp_poll_trump_voters.jpg http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_ppp_poll_trump_vot... http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_ppp_poll_trump_voters.jpg View on www.motherjones.com http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_ppp_poll_trump_voters.jpg Preview by Yahoo ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <jr_esq@...> wrote : Emily, Good research and we can't argue with this point. It shows that Trump didn't do his research before writing the executive order. He even looks more foolish after the decision from the appeals court and considering this law. He should have better advisers in his staff who can guide him to follow the American laws. After this fiasco, he should be more careful in shooting his mouth off without legal justification. Also, someone should do more research to torpedo his idea of building the Wall. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.mae50@...> wrote : Maybe you should read the 1965 law that clearly doesn't give the President the authority to do what he did. And certainly one reason he'd lose at the Supreme Court level. There would be no tie; he would lose. He's lost twice so far. And he knows it. So, he has to rewrite to save face, or double down and waste millions of dollars and his political capital losing. He's not going to take that risk with this particular Executive Order. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?_r=0 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?_r=0 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote : Trumps nominee will not be seated for months. The latest I've heard is that he plans to re-write the Executive Order because while taking it to the SC, there is a chance that it could end up in a tie, leaving the 9th Circus Court of Appeals decision to stand. So, it's just easier to re-write the order addressing the court's *concerns*. Actually, it's the 9th Circus that is *testing* the constitution. Maybe you should read the 1952 statute that clearly gives the President the authority to do what he did. A bill is currently being drafted in Congress to break-up the 9th Circus into two or more circuits. From: "jr_esq@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 10:32 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court The Appeals Court refused to uphold Trump's travel ban. But he wants to fight it at the highest court in the land. So, the fight goes on. Meanwhile, the nation is divided and in turmoil. Trump is gambling that his recent nominee will cast the winning vote for his travel ban. He is testing the Constitution to the limit. Who will win? https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html?soc_src=mail_trk=ma
Re: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court
Actually the worry is for the student visas that have been the lifeblood of the institution, visas for students at the meditating University. This term just starting with new incoming com-pro students Has a much reduced class size, “..trouble with getting visas”. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.ma...@yahoo.com> wrote : Those pundit program meditators here on H1-B visas or trying to get in on such a visa (or did the TMO stop that program?) may be at risk... ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote : Have any meditators been deported by this exec action? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.mae50@...> wrote : Maybe you should read the 1965 law that clearly doesn't give the President the authority to do what he did. And certainly one reason he'd lose at the Supreme Court level. There would be no tie; he would lose. He's lost twice so far. And he knows it. So, he has to rewrite to save face, or double down and waste millions of dollars and his political capital losing. He's not going to take that risk with this particular Executive Order. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?_r=0 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?_r=0 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote : Trumps nominee will not be seated for months. The latest I've heard is that he plans to re-write the Executive Order because while taking it to the SC, there is a chance that it could end up in a tie, leaving the 9th Circus Court of Appeals decision to stand. So, it's just easier to re-write the order addressing the court's *concerns*. Actually, it's the 9th Circus that is *testing* the constitution. Maybe you should read the 1952 statute that clearly gives the President the authority to do what he did. A bill is currently being drafted in Congress to break-up the 9th Circus into two or more circuits. From: "jr_esq@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 10:32 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court The Appeals Court refused to uphold Trump's travel ban. But he wants to fight it at the highest court in the land. So, the fight goes on. Meanwhile, the nation is divided and in turmoil. Trump is gambling that his recent nominee will cast the winning vote for his travel ban. He is testing the Constitution to the limit. Who will win? https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html?soc_src=mail_trk=ma
Re: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court
Those pundit program meditators here on H1-B visas or trying to get in on such a visa (or did the TMO stop that program?) may be at risk... ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <dhamiltony2k5@...> wrote : Have any meditators been deported by this exec action? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.mae50@...> wrote : Maybe you should read the 1965 law that clearly doesn't give the President the authority to do what he did. And certainly one reason he'd lose at the Supreme Court level. There would be no tie; he would lose. He's lost twice so far. And he knows it. So, he has to rewrite to save face, or double down and waste millions of dollars and his political capital losing. He's not going to take that risk with this particular Executive Order. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?_r=0 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?_r=0 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote : Trumps nominee will not be seated for months. The latest I've heard is that he plans to re-write the Executive Order because while taking it to the SC, there is a chance that it could end up in a tie, leaving the 9th Circus Court of Appeals decision to stand. So, it's just easier to re-write the order addressing the court's *concerns*. Actually, it's the 9th Circus that is *testing* the constitution. Maybe you should read the 1952 statute that clearly gives the President the authority to do what he did. A bill is currently being drafted in Congress to break-up the 9th Circus into two or more circuits. From: "jr_esq@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 10:32 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court The Appeals Court refused to uphold Trump's travel ban. But he wants to fight it at the highest court in the land. So, the fight goes on. Meanwhile, the nation is divided and in turmoil. Trump is gambling that his recent nominee will cast the winning vote for his travel ban. He is testing the Constitution to the limit. Who will win? https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html?soc_src=mail_trk=ma
Re: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court
Unfortunately John, most Trump supporters would claim that while there might be a law, nothing the New York Times writes is the truth, so therefore the law doesn't apply. Do you see what is wrong with that sentence? Here is a poll of Trump supporters from FFL2. We don't know anything about the sample polled, but still, the poll reflects how many think. Trump supporters don't think he looks foolish; they think he's just being Trumpish and anti-establishment. http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_ppp_poll_trump_voters.jpg http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_ppp_poll_trump_voters.jpg http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_ppp_poll_trump_voters.jpg http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_ppp_poll_trump_vot... http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_ppp_poll_trump_voters.jpg View on www.motherjones.com http://www.motherjones.com/files/blog_ppp_poll_trump_voters.jpg Preview by Yahoo ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <jr_esq@...> wrote : Emily, Good research and we can't argue with this point. It shows that Trump didn't do his research before writing the executive order. He even looks more foolish after the decision from the appeals court and considering this law. He should have better advisers in his staff who can guide him to follow the American laws. After this fiasco, he should be more careful in shooting his mouth off without legal justification. Also, someone should do more research to torpedo his idea of building the Wall. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.mae50@...> wrote : Maybe you should read the 1965 law that clearly doesn't give the President the authority to do what he did. And certainly one reason he'd lose at the Supreme Court level. There would be no tie; he would lose. He's lost twice so far. And he knows it. So, he has to rewrite to save face, or double down and waste millions of dollars and his political capital losing. He's not going to take that risk with this particular Executive Order. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?_r=0 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?_r=0 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote : Trumps nominee will not be seated for months. The latest I've heard is that he plans to re-write the Executive Order because while taking it to the SC, there is a chance that it could end up in a tie, leaving the 9th Circus Court of Appeals decision to stand. So, it's just easier to re-write the order addressing the court's *concerns*. Actually, it's the 9th Circus that is *testing* the constitution. Maybe you should read the 1952 statute that clearly gives the President the authority to do what he did. A bill is currently being drafted in Congress to break-up the 9th Circus into two or more circuits. From: "jr_esq@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 10:32 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court The Appeals Court refused to uphold Trump's travel ban. But he wants to fight it at the highest court in the land. So, the fight goes on. Meanwhile, the nation is divided and in turmoil. Trump is gambling that his recent nominee will cast the winning vote for his travel ban. He is testing the Constitution to the limit. Who will win? https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html?soc_src=mail_trk=ma
Re: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court
Emily, Good research and we can't argue with this point. It shows that Trump didn't do his research before writing the executive order. He even looks more foolish after the decision from the appeals court and considering this law. He should have better advisers in his staff who can guide him to follow the American laws. After this fiasco, he should be more careful in shooting his mouth off without legal justification. Also, someone should do more research to torpedo his idea of building the Wall. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.mae50@...> wrote : Maybe you should read the 1965 law that clearly doesn't give the President the authority to do what he did. And certainly one reason he'd lose at the Supreme Court level. There would be no tie; he would lose. He's lost twice so far. And he knows it. So, he has to rewrite to save face, or double down and waste millions of dollars and his political capital losing. He's not going to take that risk with this particular Executive Order. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?_r=0 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?_r=0 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote : Trumps nominee will not be seated for months. The latest I've heard is that he plans to re-write the Executive Order because while taking it to the SC, there is a chance that it could end up in a tie, leaving the 9th Circus Court of Appeals decision to stand. So, it's just easier to re-write the order addressing the court's *concerns*. Actually, it's the 9th Circus that is *testing* the constitution. Maybe you should read the 1952 statute that clearly gives the President the authority to do what he did. A bill is currently being drafted in Congress to break-up the 9th Circus into two or more circuits. From: "jr_esq@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 10:32 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court The Appeals Court refused to uphold Trump's travel ban. But he wants to fight it at the highest court in the land. So, the fight goes on. Meanwhile, the nation is divided and in turmoil. Trump is gambling that his recent nominee will cast the winning vote for his travel ban. He is testing the Constitution to the limit. Who will win? https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html?soc_src=mail_trk=ma
Re: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court
Have any meditators been deported by this exec action? ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <emily.ma...@yahoo.com> wrote : Maybe you should read the 1965 law that clearly doesn't give the President the authority to do what he did. And certainly one reason he'd lose at the Supreme Court level. There would be no tie; he would lose. He's lost twice so far. And he knows it. So, he has to rewrite to save face, or double down and waste millions of dollars and his political capital losing. He's not going to take that risk with this particular Executive Order. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?_r=0 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?_r=0 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote : Trumps nominee will not be seated for months. The latest I've heard is that he plans to re-write the Executive Order because while taking it to the SC, there is a chance that it could end up in a tie, leaving the 9th Circus Court of Appeals decision to stand. So, it's just easier to re-write the order addressing the court's *concerns*. Actually, it's the 9th Circus that is *testing* the constitution. Maybe you should read the 1952 statute that clearly gives the President the authority to do what he did. A bill is currently being drafted in Congress to break-up the 9th Circus into two or more circuits. From: "jr_esq@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 10:32 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court The Appeals Court refused to uphold Trump's travel ban. But he wants to fight it at the highest court in the land. So, the fight goes on. Meanwhile, the nation is divided and in turmoil. Trump is gambling that his recent nominee will cast the winning vote for his travel ban. He is testing the Constitution to the limit. Who will win? https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html?soc_src=mail_trk=ma
Re: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court
Maybe you should read the 1965 law that clearly doesn't give the President the authority to do what he did. And certainly one reason he'd lose at the Supreme Court level. There would be no tie; he would lose. He's lost twice so far. And he knows it. So, he has to rewrite to save face, or double down and waste millions of dollars and his political capital losing. He's not going to take that risk with this particular Executive Order. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?_r=0 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/opinion/trumps-immigration-ban-is-illegal.html?_r=0 ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote : Trumps nominee will not be seated for months. The latest I've heard is that he plans to re-write the Executive Order because while taking it to the SC, there is a chance that it could end up in a tie, leaving the 9th Circus Court of Appeals decision to stand. So, it's just easier to re-write the order addressing the court's *concerns*. Actually, it's the 9th Circus that is *testing* the constitution. Maybe you should read the 1952 statute that clearly gives the President the authority to do what he did. A bill is currently being drafted in Congress to break-up the 9th Circus into two or more circuits. From: "jr_esq@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 10:32 PM Subject: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court The Appeals Court refused to uphold Trump's travel ban. But he wants to fight it at the highest court in the land. So, the fight goes on. Meanwhile, the nation is divided and in turmoil. Trump is gambling that his recent nominee will cast the winning vote for his travel ban. He is testing the Constitution to the limit. Who will win? https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html?soc_src=mail_trk=ma
Re: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court
Trumps nominee will not be seated for months. The latest I've heard is that he
plans to re-write the Executive Order because while taking it to the SC, there
is a chance that it could end up in a tie, leaving the 9th Circus Court of
Appeals decision to stand. So, it's just easier to re-write the order
addressing the court's *concerns*.
Actually, it's the 9th Circus that is *testing* the constitution. Maybe you
should read the 1952 statute that clearly gives the President the authority to
do what he did.A bill is currently being drafted in Congress to break-up the
9th Circus into two or more circuits.
From: "jr_...@yahoo.com [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com>
To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 10:32 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court
The Appeals Court refused to uphold Trump's travel ban. But he wants to
fight it at the highest court in the land. So, the fight goes on. Meanwhile,
the nation is divided and in turmoil. Trump is gambling that his recent
nominee will cast the winning vote for his travel ban. He is testing the
Constitution to the limit. Who will win?
https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html
#yiv6090911387 #yiv6090911387 -- #yiv6090911387ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv6090911387
#yiv6090911387ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv6090911387
#yiv6090911387ygrp-mkp #yiv6090911387hd
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px
0;}#yiv6090911387 #yiv6090911387ygrp-mkp #yiv6090911387ads
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv6090911387 #yiv6090911387ygrp-mkp .yiv6090911387ad
{padding:0 0;}#yiv6090911387 #yiv6090911387ygrp-mkp .yiv6090911387ad p
{margin:0;}#yiv6090911387 #yiv6090911387ygrp-mkp .yiv6090911387ad a
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv6090911387 #yiv6090911387ygrp-sponsor
#yiv6090911387ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv6090911387
#yiv6090911387ygrp-sponsor #yiv6090911387ygrp-lc #yiv6090911387hd {margin:10px
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv6090911387
#yiv6090911387ygrp-sponsor #yiv6090911387ygrp-lc .yiv6090911387ad
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv6090911387 #yiv6090911387actions
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv6090911387
#yiv6090911387activity
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv6090911387
#yiv6090911387activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv6090911387
#yiv6090911387activity span:first-child
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv6090911387 #yiv6090911387activity span a
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv6090911387 #yiv6090911387activity span
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv6090911387 #yiv6090911387activity span
.yiv6090911387underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv6090911387
.yiv6090911387attach
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px
0;width:400px;}#yiv6090911387 .yiv6090911387attach div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv6090911387 .yiv6090911387attach img
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv6090911387 .yiv6090911387attach label
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv6090911387 .yiv6090911387attach label a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv6090911387 blockquote {margin:0 0 0
4px;}#yiv6090911387 .yiv6090911387bold
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv6090911387
.yiv6090911387bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6090911387 dd.yiv6090911387last
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv6090911387 dd.yiv6090911387last p
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv6090911387
dd.yiv6090911387last p span.yiv6090911387yshortcuts
{margin-right:0;}#yiv6090911387 div.yiv6090911387attach-table div div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv6090911387 div.yiv6090911387attach-table
{width:400px;}#yiv6090911387 div.yiv6090911387file-title a, #yiv6090911387
div.yiv6090911387file-title a:active, #yiv6090911387
div.yiv6090911387file-title a:hover, #yiv6090911387 div.yiv6090911387file-title
a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6090911387 div.yiv6090911387photo-title a,
#yiv6090911387 div.yiv6090911387photo-title a:active, #yiv6090911387
div.yiv6090911387photo-title a:hover, #yiv6090911387
div.yiv6090911387photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv6090911387
div#yiv6090911387ygrp-mlmsg #yiv6090911387ygrp-msg p a
span.yiv6090911387yshortcuts
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv6090911387
.yiv6090911387green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv6090911387 .yiv6090911387MsoNormal
{margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv6090911387 o {font-size:0;}#yiv6090911387
#yiv6090911387photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv6090911387
#yiv6090911387photos div div {border:1px solid
#66;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv6090911387
#yiv6090911387photos div label
{color:#66;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px
[FairfieldLife] See You at the Supreme Court
The Appeals Court refused to uphold Trump's travel ban. But he wants to fight it at the highest court in the land. So, the fight goes on. Meanwhile, the nation is divided and in turmoil. Trump is gambling that his recent nominee will cast the winning vote for his travel ban. He is testing the Constitution to the limit. Who will win? https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/appeals-court-decision-trump-travel-ban-coming-thursday-221158821.html
