https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/879358575981850625Not even wrong wrote:
Your title pretty much misses the whole point of what happened today. The Court said nothing about whether it agreed with the travel ban. That is for another day.
https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/879358575981850625Not even wrong wrote:
Your title pretty much misses the whole point of what happened today. The Court said nothing about whether it agreed with the travel ban. That is for another day.
Here's what Very Fake News said (unhappily of course).
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/26/politics/trump-travel-ban-decision/index.html
Here's what Very Fake News said (unhappily of course).
Yes, the WaPo will probably be looking to Memory-hole its commentary too.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2017/06/12/opponents-of-trumps-travel-ban-must-be-tired-of-winning/Here is a typical Dem response.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDI21LBrOpMSen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)
"This is like the three horsemen of the apocalypse (Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch), and they're waiting for the fourth one to come along so that they can go on their trend toward what I call extremism."
And another.
https://www.democraticwhip.gov/content/hoyer-statement-supreme-court-allowing-enforcement-muslim-ban-provisions-pending-rulingHouse Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Maryland)
"This ban places our country in serious danger and undermines the very foundations of our democracy. It hands a victory to ISIS and other terror groups by providing them with a potent tool for recruitment and radicalization."
Her specialty is bankruptcy wrote:
Sally Yates goshome DEVASTATED wrote:https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DDR0C5fXkAAknrF.jpg:largeStopping mocking the Harvard Law professor.
You mean "Chief Spreading Bull" don't you?
Might only be 8-0 when it is re-heard.