Supreme court 5 to 4 upholds Trumps travel ban

[Wazzzup]

[size=150]In Vindicating Trump's Travel Ban, the Supreme Court Upheld the Law[/size]

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/supreme-court-travel-ban-decision-upholds-law/">https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/ ... holds-law/">https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/supreme-court-travel-ban-decision-upholds-law/



Thanks to trump and 5 members of the supreme court America just dodged the road to being another caliphate that Obama put us on.  There's lots more that needs to be done, but this is a big win against the Muslim/progressive alliance.

[Anonymous]

It's only a victory for the Trump administration.

[Rose]

https://78.media.tumblr.com/4f4ea2e46d83ad8f8002128cf6cd8ff8/tumblr_olbvzlySna1qa4l1ko5_540.gif">

[Anonymous]

But, congress didn't give him any money for a Southern wall.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand the point of the ban.

[Frood]

I don't understand the point of the ban.

The ban was temporary in nature, able to be renewed with ratification, and applied to nations with war zones or hostilities towards the West.



They were Muslim nations. The press latched onto the idea that it was a ban on Muslims, but huge Muslim nations like Indonesia and Saudi Arabia weren't on the list as they weren't conflict regions. Many others weren't on the list. The list was pretty clear in isolating conflict regions from peaceful or relatively peaceful Muslim nations.



Whether it was a good idea or not. Whether it would matter or not for prevention didn't matter because the left seized upon the subterfuge that it was islamaphobia and took it to the courts to stop a sitting US president from exercising his or her prerogative to protect the nation within the immigration or visitor model.

[Wazzzup]

I don't understand the point of the ban.

The ban was temporary in nature, able to be renewed with ratification, and applied to nations with war zones or hostilities towards the West.



They were Muslim nations. The press latched onto the idea that it was a ban on Muslims, but huge Muslim nations like Indonesia and Saudi Arabia weren't on the list as they weren't conflict regions. Many others weren't on the list. The list was pretty clear in isolating conflict regions from peaceful or relatively peaceful Muslim nations.



Whether it was a good idea or not. Whether it would matter or not for prevention didn't matter because the left seized upon the subterfuge that it was islamaphobia and took it to the courts to stop a sitting US president from exercising his or her prerogative to protect the nation within the immigration or visitor model.

yes.  According to pew there are 50 majority Muslim countries, there are only 5 muslim majority countries on Trumps travel ban.  90% of Muslim majority countries are not travel banned.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand the point of the ban.

The ban was temporary in nature, able to be renewed with ratification, and applied to nations with war zones or hostilities towards the West.



They were Muslim nations. The press latched onto the idea that it was a ban on Muslims, but huge Muslim nations like Indonesia and Saudi Arabia weren't on the list as they weren't conflict regions. Many others weren't on the list. The list was pretty clear in isolating conflict regions from peaceful or relatively peaceful Muslim nations.



Whether it was a good idea or not. Whether it would matter or not for prevention didn't matter because the left seized upon the subterfuge that it was islamaphobia and took it to the courts to stop a sitting US president from exercising his or her prerogative to protect the nation within the immigration or visitor model.

Why It's been eighteen months since his inauguration and Trump is still continuing with his temporary travel ban.

[Wazzzup]

I don't understand the point of the ban.

The ban was temporary in nature, able to be renewed with ratification, and applied to nations with war zones or hostilities towards the West.



They were Muslim nations. The press latched onto the idea that it was a ban on Muslims, but huge Muslim nations like Indonesia and Saudi Arabia weren't on the list as they weren't conflict regions. Many others weren't on the list. The list was pretty clear in isolating conflict regions from peaceful or relatively peaceful Muslim nations.



Whether it was a good idea or not. Whether it would matter or not for prevention didn't matter because the left seized upon the subterfuge that it was islamaphobia and took it to the courts to stop a sitting US president from exercising his or her prerogative to protect the nation within the immigration or visitor model.

Why It's been eighteen months since his inauguration and Trump is still continuing with his temporary travel ban.

I believe it is re-evaluated every 90 or 120 days. The list of the countries has changed slightly here and there over time.

[Wazzzup]

Just a general comment on immigration



As many of you know  I have two sons.  They are both white males going into a society, thanks to leftists, that is increasingly hostile to whites especially white males.  These same progressive are trying to hustle as many Hispanics and Muslims into America as they can, to get votes for their democrat party which is increasingly hostile to white males.  This means whites, who are now dying faster in many states than they are reproducing ,will be outnumbered in about twenty years (maybe less) unless something is done to stop it.   if nothing is done to stop the flow, my two boys will be at the mercy of a new majority that very likely many of which will hate them and vote to strip them of their rights.



I'd like to be more welcoming, but because of the current status of politics and the games being played, that would be risking destroying my sons futures.    Now if somebody can find a way to convince me this could never happen, I'll listen, maybe even change my mind.  but until then, I am going to be dead set against nearly all immigration into America.  There is way too much at stake and very little to gain.



So I ask you, what would you do to save your family?  This is what I feel I have to do.

[Anonymous]

I have very strong opinions on immigration. Suffice it say Canada accepts far too many immigrants. No refugees at all should be accepted.