December 1-4, 2017
Dec 01 00:25 Kate Steinle verdict & The Wall Dec 01 16:02 Let's use the Steinle verdict Dec 02 04:38 Senate passes Tax Cuts & Jobs Act Dec 02 12:08 The GOP advantage in 2018? Dec 02 15:53 Tax reform's terrain change Dec 02 21:47 The DFL's Franken-crime Dec 03 10:03 The Flynn indictment Dec 04 02:16 The Vikings are for real Dec 04 16:39 Trump's momentous SCOTUS victory
Prior Months: Jan Feb ~ May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Kate Steinle verdict & The Wall
Saying that Twitter is rendering a different verdict than the Steinle jury reached is understatement. The sanctuary city lowlifes that reached their not-guilty verdicts should be ashamed of themselves. Earlier tonight, the Steinle jury ruled Jose Ines Garcia Zarate not guilty . Tonight, the Steinle jury "found a Mexican man not guilty of murder in the killing of a woman on a San Francisco pier that set off a national immigration debate two years ago. Jose Ines Garcia Zarate was found guilty of being a felon in possession of a firearm."
La Raza, the vast majority of the Democratic Party and others who don't care about the rule of law undoubtedly are quietly rejoicing. That rejoicing will be short-lived. Andy McCarthy just posted this tweet , in which he stated "It is a federal felony, up to 10 yrs' imprisonment, to be an illegal alien in possession of firearm (18 USC secs.922(g), 924). DOJ should indict Zarate if haven't already. Sentence consecutive to today's state gun conviction could keep him in prison 13 yrs or so."
Attorney Gen. Jeff Sessions issued this statement :
When jurisdictions choose to return criminal aliens to the streets rather than turning them over to federal immigration authorities, they put the public's safety at risk. San Francisco's decision to protect criminal aliens led to the preventable and heartbreaking death of Kate Steinle. While the State of California sought a murder charge for the man who caused Ms. Steinle's death-a man who would not have been on the streets of San Francisco if the city simply honored an ICE detainer-the people ultimately convicted him of felon in possession of a firearm.
The Department of Justice will continue to ensure that all jurisdictions place the safety and security of their communities above the convenience of criminal aliens. I urge the leaders of the nation's communities to reflect on the outcome of this case and consider carefully the harm they are doing to their citizens by refusing to cooperate with federal law enforcement officers.
Democrats have threatened shutting the government down if Republicans don't cave on DACA. If Democrats continue to insist on that, they'll get trampled by the biggest Caterpillar they've ever seen. Based on what's trending on Twitter, I'm betting that those people will be more than motivated that The Wall be built immediately. I'm also betting that they'll be motivated to vote out any dirtbag standing in the way of building the wall.
This video is of Jim Steinle testifying in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee:
[Video no longer available]
In his testimony that day, Jim Steinle said "In fact the day she was killed we were walking arm-in-arm on Pier 14 in San Francisco enjoying a wonderful day together. Suddenly a shot rang out. Kate fell and looked at me and said 'Help me dad.' Those are last words I will ever hear from my daughter." The Democrats on the Committee have Kate Steinle's blood on their hands.
Jim Steinle couldn't help his daughter that afternoon the way any father would've liked to have helped. I'm betting that breaks his heart to this day. Let's help Jim receive justice in a different way. Let's defeat the dirtbags that didn't care about his daughter's safety.
Further, let's hope that SF law enforcement officials that ignored ICE's request that the murderer be turned over and the City of San Francisco get hit with a massive wrongful death lawsuit that costs them 10s, if not 100s, of millions of dollars.
Finally, when The Wall is finally built, it should be named Kate's Wall. That'd be fitting, wouldn't it?
Posted Friday, December 1, 2017 12:25 AM
No comments.
Let's use the Steinle verdict
I just read Roger Simon's article about the Steinle miscarriage of justice verdict. Saying that it's pi$$ed me off is understatement. Simon is right in saying "the real villains in the Kate Steinle story are the San Francisco politicians who made the rules that prevented ICE from removing the already five-time deported criminal Zarate from the country. These SF pols already had Kate's murder forever on their consciences, what they have of them anyway. Now they will also have to deal with the growing disgust of the American public and an administration that loathes these politicians, backed up by a Supreme Court that will ultimately be on the side of that administration for most actions it might take."
Let's be perfectly clear about this. Let's tell our politicians to insist that they fund the building of the wall. Let's tell them that people that stand in the way of the building of that wall are road kill. Let's tell these politicians that letting another person die at the hands of an illegal alien or a member of MS-13 isn't acceptable. We won't put up with that.
Simon made a series of predictions, starting with "Attorney General Sessions, with the firm backing of the president, will redouble his efforts to do away with sanctuary cities both financially and legally. It may take some time, but the days of these sanctuaries are over."
This morning, I said that the Steinle family will get a little justice when they win their wrongful death lawsuit against SF politicians. After 10s of millions of dollars are stripped from their budget, they'll feel even greater financial pain.
The border wall will be built, at least a good part of it, and Trump will find it far easier to get his way with border security. The Dreamers will remain, but the public will back Trump on further security measures that will be enacted. Those measures will be stronger than hitherto predicted.
Swing-state or red-state Democrats that vote against the wall will suddenly face an uphill fight for re-election.
Fewer people will "leave their hearts in San Francisco." Many Californians have already left the state, but some who have been on the fence about decamping will get off that fence and finally leave.
It's time to send the message that these politicians are insane and we won't tolerate it anymore.
Finally, let's use the Steinle miscarriage of justice to prove that Democrats care more about playing identity politics than keeping people safe.
[Video no longer available]
Posted Friday, December 1, 2017 4:03 PM
No comments.
Senate passes Tax Cuts & Jobs Act
At 12:51 am CT, Vice President Pence announced that the Senate had passed the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act by a 51-49 vote. Shortly thereafter, President Trump "tweeted his reaction," saying "We are one step closer to delivering MASSIVE tax cuts for working families across America," the president wrote. "Special thanks to @SenateMajLdr Mitch McConnell and Chairman @SenOrrinHatch for shepherding our bill through the Senate. Look forward to signing a final bill before Christmas!"
Naturally, Democrats criticized the bill. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi chimed in, "calling the legislation a 'betrayal of the American middle class.'" then adding that the "GOP tax scam is a product of haste, carelessness and cruelty," Pelosi wrote. "It was written on Republicans' trickle-down delusions, not analysis or facts. It was written first and foremost for the wealthiest one percent, not middle class families trying to get ahead."
In a little over a year since getting elected, President Trump has earned the trust of the American people on the economy. As I've stated before, unemployment is dropping, consumer confidence is soaring and the economy is growing at a 3.3% annual rate, something that the Democrats said was impossible. Remember that when you read Ms. Pelosi's statement:
Speaker Ryan issued this statement congratulating the Senate on passing the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act:
I commend my Senate colleagues for this historic action. For the first time since 1986, both the House and the Senate have passed a major overhaul of our nation's tax code. Now we will move quickly to a conference committee so we can get a final bill to President Trump's desk. The hardworking people of this country are counting on us to deliver real relief. That means more jobs, faster economic growth, bigger paychecks, and a tax cut for Americans from all walks of life. These opportunities only come around once in a generation, and now it is time for us to seize this moment.
Chuck Schumer preached doom and gloom on the Senate floor, saying that "Historians will mark today as one of the darkest, black letter days in the long history of this Senate."
[Video no longer available]
Let's be clear about this. Not a single Democrat voted for the bill in the House or Senate. Further, when President Trump invited Ms. Pelosi, Sen. Schumer, Sen. McConnell and Speaker Ryan to negotiate a budget deal, Pelosi and Schumer were no-shows. Sen. Schumer has expressed a willingness to shut down the government if the bill to fund government operations includes funding for building Kate's Wall along the U.S.-Mexican border.
Summarizing things, Democrats hate cutting taxes, want to shut down the government and oppose building a border wall that will keep illegal aliens, drug smugglers and human traffickers out of the United States. In other words, they don't want to fund the government, protect the people or implement policies that grow the economy. Other than that, they're great.
Posted Saturday, December 2, 2017 4:38 AM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 02-Dec-17 06:42 AM
Every time Pelosi, Shumer or any other democrat bitches about this tax plan (which I have no idea if it will help or hurt me), Ryan or McConnell needs to remind them of the Obamacare law that was passed with haste, carelessness, and cruelty and without any facts and that they still refuse to believe the facts of how it is destroying our economy and peoples lives.
The GOP advantage in 2018?
This article thinks that control of the House is a coin flip at this point. In it, Kyle Kondik, the managing editor of Sabato's Crystal Ball, says "the Democrats' chances of winning the House have only seemed to rise, based on a number of indicators. Those are the president's approval rating is consistently at or under 40%, which is historically weak for a new president and typically is quite important in midterm outcomes, with a lower number meaning bigger trouble for the president's party. Yes, there is time for Trump's approval to improve. However, since a brief inauguration 'honeymoon,' the president has shown little ability to push his approval much higher than the low 40s."
Mr. Kondik is apply pre-Trump rules to a Trump world. When we elected President Trump, we threw out the pre-Trump rules. Further, a pattern has started to develop that won't help Democrats. Other than 2006, Republicans have owned the midterms. In 2010, Republicans got to run against the ACA. They won 63 seats in the House that year. It wasn't just that they won a ton of seats in the House that year. It's that they demolished the Democratic Party's bench that year, too:
According to their map, Republicans control both houses of their state legislatures in 25 states. Here's the list of states where Republicans control both houses of the legislature: Idaho, Utah, Arizona, Montana, Wyoming, North and South Dakota, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Minnesota, Missouri, Wisconsin, Tennessee, Michigan, Indiana, Alabama, Ohio, Georgia, Florida, Maine, Pennsylvania, North and South Carolina and New Hampshire
That isn't all:
According to moderator Paul Gigot, Republicans gained 680 state legislative seats in last Tuesday's elections.
That's just part of the Democrats' problem. Another part of their dilemma is that they don't have anything to run on. Every Democrat in DC voted against the Republicans' tax cut. The economy under Trump is improving significantly. I've said repeatedly that consumer confidence is surging. Jobs are getting created.
These aren't the headlines that indicate a wave election. Further, Republicans stand to gain a bunch of Senate seats in 2018. Wave elections indicate that the people have a 'throw the bums out' attitude towards the party in power. Another factor that can't be overlooked is the fact that Democrats still don't have a message that sells in America's heartland. Until they set aside their craziness, they won't win the blue collar states they need to retake the House.
At this point, I'd rate the Democrats' chances of retaking the House as slim. Their chance of retaking the Senate doesn't exist. If there's a wave happening this cycle, it's virtually invisible at this point. One thing that's interesting is that Jason Lewis seat is nowhere to be found as vulnerable:
Republicans still should take this cycle seriously. That being said, Democrats don't have the advantage that the media is reporting.
Posted Saturday, December 2, 2017 12:08 PM
No comments.
Tax reform's terrain change
Newt Gingrich's op-ed congratulates Republicans for passing the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act. It was a hard-fought victory and a time-consuming fight. The sausage-making certainly wasn't pretty. Still, it's a positive step forward for Republicans. All that's left is the conference committee that will iron out the differences, then a final vote before President Trump signs it into law.
The conference committee work has already started. This won't take nearly as long as 'experts' have predicted. I expect a signing ceremony comfortably before Christmas. That's my prediction. Speaker Gingrich's prediction is a bit different but just as important. Newt prediction is simple, saying "If Republicans can make sure that the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is signed by President Trump by Christmas, our economy will immediately start growing, there will be more jobs in our country, American workers will see their wages increase, and we will begin a new era of American prosperity and leadership."
To the Democrats that insist that the economy will never grow at 3% again, I'll partially agree. I'm predicting that the economy will grow at 4% for 2018. This is good advice, too:
Republicans must accept that the left and the news media are going to continue to distort the positive impact these tax cuts will have on our country. The liberal elite will do all they can to keep the party and the president from succeeding at anything. They know that if Republicans pass the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act before Christmas, history will remember this tremendous success rather than the growing pains Republicans wrestled with earlier in 2017.
Then there's this:
The US economy will grow as a result of this bill. The only questions are about how fast it will grow and which sector will see their wages grow the most. This video explains why the Fox News/Fox Business franchise keeps growing:
[Video no longer available]
Thanks to the Trump Transformation of the economy, people are already feeling bullish. I can't picture people feeling negative when they get their 401(k) statements. With stocks establishing milestone highs seemingly monthly, Republicans can run on that issue alone and win. The Democrats will be forced to either adjust and participate or they can run as a purely oppositional party.
Posted Saturday, December 2, 2017 3:53 PM
No comments.
The DFL's Franken-crime
Thus far, DFL politicians and activists have protected Sen. Franken. Despite the fact that he's done some utterly despicable things, the DFL has defended him. There's a method to their defense that's worth exposing. Part of the DFL's protection of Sen. Franken is to pretend that they're doing something. That's what Amy Klobuchar is doing. Sen. Klobuchar issued a statement that said "This should not have happened to Leeann Tweeden. I strongly condemn this behavior and the Senate Ethics Committee must open an investigation. This is another example of why we need to change work environments and reporting practices across the nation, including in Congress."
Sen. Klobuchar, what's to investigate? Wasn't the picture of Sen. Franken groping Ms. Tweeden enough? Sen. Franken admitted that he'd groped her. The Senate Ethics Committee shouldn't take more than an hour before recommending expulsion from the Senate. The vote should be unanimous, both in committee and on the Senate floor.
Another technique that the DFL has used is talking about all the times Groper Al has voted for pro-women legislation. Friday night, that's how Ember Reichgott-Junge attempted to defend Groper Al. The other 3 women on the political panel tore that defense apart. Ms. Reichgott-Junge said that Groper Al had earned the trust of millions of voters. First, I'd seriously doubt that. I think people voted for Groper Al because he had a D behind his name on the ballot and because they didn't care whether he was a tax cheat, a drug addict or a pervert. They just wanted someone who'd vote their way on their issues. Next, it isn't difficult to find other DFL perverts that are willing to vote for such legislation.
Ultimately, the DFL is to blame. They're the political party that didn't care whether Sen. Franken was a pervert. They didn't set a high standard in terms of ethics. The DFL was totally comfortable looking past Sen. Franken's talk about raping Leslie Stahl. Democrats now profess to have adopted a zero tolerance policy. That's odd. In the 1990s, Democrats only cared whether their candidates committed to voting for partial birth abortion legislation.
[Video no longer available]
I won't pretend that all Republicans are trustworthy. I will say, though, that the DFL hasn't established a high standard of conduct for its elected officials. That's why Sen. Franken's gotten away with being a pervert.
Posted Saturday, December 2, 2017 9:47 PM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 03-Dec-17 07:09 AM
I guess with this logic, all I have to do in the eyes of a DFLer is to plant a lot of trees and speak on behalf of the environment and then I can pollute as much as I want, right?
You are right, the DFL loyalists will vote for anyone with a D behind their name.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 03-Dec-17 10:09 AM
We can't call them hypocrites, either, because they don't pretend to have high moral standards.
The Flynn indictment
This morning, Rep. Adam Schiff, (D-Calif.), said that the Flynn plea deal is a big deal . He told George Stephanopoulos "I think this is very significant. I think the fact that in his factual basis for the plea he sets out that he wasn't acting as a rogue agent. And I think it indicates to me at least, that this is not the end of it by any means." Later, Schiff said "he believes Flynn will incriminate other members of the administration, but said he does not know if the probe will move all the way up to Trump."
Famed criminal defense attorney and former Harvard law Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz offered a different opinion . Dershowitz wrote that "The first question is, why did Flynn lie? People who lie to the FBI generally do so because, if they told the truth, they would be admitting to a crime. But the two conversations that Flynn falsely denied having were not criminal. He may have believed they were criminal but, if he did, he was wrong."
Dershowitz added "Consider his request to Sergey I. Kislyak, Russian ambassador to the U.S., to delay or oppose a United Nations Security Council vote on an anti-Israel resolution that the outgoing Obama administration refused to veto. Not only was that request not criminal, it was the right thing to do. President Obama's unilateral decision to change decades-long American policy by not vetoing a perniciously one-sided anti-Israel resolution was opposed by Congress and by most Americans. It was not good for America, for Israel or for peace. It was done out of Obama's personal pique against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rather than on principle."
Next, Dershowitz added this:
As the president-elect, Donald Trump was constitutionally and politically entitled to try to protect his ability to broker a fair peace between the Israelis and Palestinians by urging all members of the Security Council to vote against or delay the enactment of the resolution.
Finally, Dershowitz said this:
So, despite the banner headlines calling the Flynn guilty plea a 'thunderclap,' I think it may be a show of weakness on the part of the special counsel rather than a sign of strength. So far he has had to charge potential witnesses with crimes that bear little or no relationship to any possible crimes committed by current White House incumbents. Mueller would have much preferred to indict Flynn for conspiracy or some other crime directly involving other people, but he apparently lacks the evidence to do so.
I do not believe he will indict anyone under the Logan Act. If he were to do so, that would be unethical and irresponsible. Nor do I think he will charge President Trump with any crimes growing out of the president's exercise of his constitutional authority to fire the director of the FBI or to ask him not to prosecute Flynn.
Mr. Schiff has a history of overhyping what's happening. This investigation is about the Democrats' attempt to criminalize political policy differences. Dershowitz finished his op-ed by saying "The investigation will probably not end quickly, but it may end with, not a thunderclap, but several whimpers."
[Video no longer available]
Posted Sunday, December 3, 2017 10:03 AM
Comment 1 by eric z. at 04-Dec-17 12:47 PM
Is Dershowitz suggesting a tail should wag a dog?
Can K. T. McFarlane whimper?
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 04-Dec-17 04:07 PM
Dershowitz is saying that criminalizing policy disputes undermines our system of government. Should politicians have the ability to undermine people's confidence in government because they didn't get their way? I'd call that the tyranny of the minority.
Comment 2 by eric z. at 05-Dec-17 08:37 AM
You have confidence in THIS government? Bless you, Gary, I have a bridge to sell you. Right there in St. Cloud crossing the river, so name your price.
Comment 3 by eric z. at 05-Dec-17 08:47 AM
Two other things: In saying Alan D. is a "famed criminal defense attorney" do you have any evidence he's ever litigated a criminal case in his life? He's a pompous academic, not a trial lawyer with any "If the glove don't fit" moxie. Can you give me a link to any online criminal defense case he's litigated? Any court, any level, even contesting a jaywalking ticket?
Second, in captioning "Flynn indictment" you neglect "Flynn plea." Most would say the plea deal is the news.
When all that Flynn/campaign dealings with the Russians was going on Pence was singing, "Back Home in Indiana." I really hope they can rope him into something.
Comment 4 by eric z. at 05-Dec-17 11:49 AM
I WAS WRONG.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-30705703
Dershowitz was on the Simpson defense team, although he did not give closing argument, that was "glove don't fit" lead counsel, and I could not find whether he questioned any of the several witnesses in that trial.
That BBC article and this one show you, Gary, correctly calling him a criminal defense lawyer:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/13/business/alan-dershowitz-on-the-defense-his-own.html
That Dec. 2015 case NYT reported about came almost two years to the day too early. Given a mood afoot today, Al would have had a more difficult press review. He would have been more a target of attention than generating only one online NYT item.
The Dershowitz item you cited is inflamatory and judgmental rather than factual when he gets to Zionism and land-grabbing that the entire UN Security Council membership unanimously condemend once Obama reversed the pro-Zionist use of UN Security Counsel veto and the unanimity was apart from the single abstention.
Dershowitz, I suggest, was correct in that item when writing:
"Some left-wing pundits, who know better, are trotting out the Logan Act, which, if it were the law, would prohibit private citizens (including presidents-elect) from negotiating with foreign governments. But this anachronistic law hasn't been used for more than 200 years. Under the principle of desuetude - a legal doctrine that prohibits the selective resurrection of a statute that has not been used for many decades - it is dead-letter. Moreover, the Logan Act is unconstitutional insofar as it prohibits the exercise of free speech.
"If it were good law, former Presidents Reagan and Carter would have been prosecuted: Reagan for negotiating with Iran's ayatollahs when he was president-elect, to delay releasing the American hostages until he was sworn in; Carter for advising Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat to reject former President Clinton's peace offer in 2000-2001. Moreover, Jesse Jackson, Jane Fonda, Dennis Rodman and others who have negotiated with North Korea and other rogue regimes would have gone to prison."
I expect LFRB readers would agree; the Logan Act is a red herring.
But, Gary, I WAS WRONG. That said, have a good new year.
Response 4.1 by Gary Gross at 05-Dec-17 01:33 PM
Eric, thanks for that clarification. Unlike ABC's 'clarification', I know that yours is sincere. The Logan Act hasn't been used simply because its constitutionality is questionable. I understand the logic behind it. It's just that I'm certain it violates the First Amendment.
Happy New Year to you, too.
The Vikings are for real
It's time for the NFL to admit that the Vikings are a legitimate Super Bowl Championship contender. Thanks to their dominant victory over Atlanta (in Atlanta) and Seattle's victory over Philadelphia, the Vikings are now the top seed in the NFC. Both teams have 10-2 records but the Vikings would get the top seed because they'd win the 4th tie-breaker .
Case Keenum turned in another impressive performance completing 25 of 30 passes for 227 yards and 2 TDs without any interceptions. Making that stat-line all the more impressive is the fact that he completed all 13 of his passes in the second half.
The game was won on defense, though. Last week, Julio Jones caught 12 passes for 253 yards. This week, playing against Xavier Rhodes, the best corner in the game, Jones caught 2 passes for a total of 24 yards. The Vikings' pass rush intimidated Atlanta so much that they abandoned 5- and 7-step drop plays. That made things easier for Rhodes, who didn't have to cover Jones as long. After the game, Deion Sanders called Xavier Rhodes a call to congratulate Rhodes on his performance. Check this out:
[Video no longer available]
Mike Wobschall at Vikings.com said this about Mike Zimmer's defensive game plan:
We saw yet another team significantly alter their offensive strategy, specifically as it relates to the passing game, while going against the Vikings defense. Opposing offenses continue to feature the quick-strike passing game, likely to take away the Vikings pass rush. The good news for opposing offenses is that does reduce the number of sacks the Vikings have; Ryan wasn't sacked on Sunday. The bad news is it severely limits the ability to register explosive gains. The Falcons came into Sunday's game averaging 9.3 explosive gains per game, and against the Vikings they had one. This is largely because Atlanta essentially refused to put Ryan on a five-step or seven-step drop to give receivers time to get open downfield. The few times Ryan did try that, he was blasted right as he released the ball and the passes fell incomplete as Ryan tried to pick himself up off the turf.
The difference between the Vikings' defense and the rest of the league's top defenses is that the Vikings are loaded at all 3 levels, the Vikings are super-physical and the Vikings' defenders are the best tacklers in the league.
The Vikings came into the game with the top third-down defense. Atlanta came into the game with the best third-down offense. When the statistics were compiled, the Vikings' defense stopped Atlanta's offense 9 times in 10 third-down opportunities.
As good as they've been, there's no letting up for the Vikings. Next week, they take on the Carolina Panthers in Carolina. Considering the fact that the Panthers got whipped by the Saints yesterday, the Panthers will likely be ready to play the game of their lives. The good news for the Vikings is that they've met each of their challenges this season.
Posted Monday, December 4, 2017 2:16 AM
Comment 1 by eric z. at 04-Dec-17 12:53 PM
I can quickly think of two guys in Boston who'd want to test such hypotheses. Along with their associates.
Comment 2 by Chad Q at 04-Dec-17 05:07 PM
This team is good once a decade and they find away to lose every time, 1987, 1998, 2009, and now 2017. Until the Vikings are up by 20 with 10 seconds left in the Super Bowl, I won't believe they are for real.
Trump's momentous SCOTUS victory
I wasn't surprised that the Supreme Court ruled in President Trump's favor in the lawsuit that restricts travel from 6 majority Muslim nations. I'm definitely surprised that it was a 7-2 verdict .
According to the article, "The Supreme Court is allowing the Trump administration to fully enforce a ban on travel to the United States by residents of six mostly Muslim countries. The justices, with two dissenting votes, said Monday that the policy can take full effect even as legal challenges against it make their way through the courts. The action suggests the high court could uphold the latest version of the ban that Trump announced in September." The article additionally said that "Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor would have left the lower court orders in place."
I can't imagine the Supreme Court not ruling in President Trump's favor in its final ruling after making this ruling.
Finally, the article said "Both courts are dealing with the issue on an accelerated basis, and the Supreme Court noted it expects those courts to reach decisions 'with appropriate dispatch.' Quick resolution by appellate courts would allow the Supreme Court to hear and decide the issue this term, by the end of June."
Posted Monday, December 4, 2017 4:39 PM
No comments.
