|
05-31-2017, 06:00 PM
|
|
n/a
|
|
Join Date: n/a
Posts: n/a
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Guest
You brought up lying, so why are you so disingenuous by acting indignant about my bringing up the queen of lies herself? You are putting up suppositions that the reason they refused Trump is because he lies and they can't trust him. Are you suggesting that the court is not being honest? After all, why would they use his campaign rhetoric as a basis for this instead of just seeing if it conforms with the law? You are suggesting that the court is not being honest. I could probably agree with you on that idea.
|
"A substantial majority of the judges who sit on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in Richmond delivered a rather remarkable judgment last week: The president of the United States is not to be believed.
Will the Supreme Court conclude the same thing? And by “Supreme Court,” we mean “Justice Anthony M. Kennedy,” whose name was invoked 23 times in the 205 pages of majority opinions, concurrences and dissents in the appeals court’s 10-to-3 rejection of President Trump’s revised travel ban."
Court says essentially that Trump is not to be believed. Will Supreme Court conclude the same? - The Washington Post
"But it’s worth another look at the remarkable rhetoric in Chief Judge Roger L. Gregory’s majority opinion, which concludes that Trump’s “true reason” for the travel ban was not protecting the nation’s security but making good on a campaign promise born of anti-Muslim bias.
As Harvard law professor Noah Feldman put it in an essay for Bloomberg News, “It’s extraordinary for a federal court to tell the president directly that he’s lying; I certainly can’t think of any other examples in my lifetime.”
|