Hi :)
Hope this is ok to post this. I am not in need of assistance here, but was wondering if someone can set me straight on the law, and how things work in the judicial system. And assuming this thread is ok, please let's not turn this into a political discussion, and debate whether the President is right or wrong from a moral perspective; I am inquiring to satisfy my curiosity about the law and the courts.
I have not read the exec. order, but I have read the law dealing with immigration, which seems to suggest that the exec. order is legal. USC 1182 sec. (f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President - seems to suggest that the President may suspend entry to this country of anyone, if he feels such entry would be detrimental to the interests of the USA.
Plus, there is the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952 which allows the President to place a temporary restriction on immigration based on country of origin, which further seems to support the President's authority here.
So, I question what grounds any judge has to stay the ban - if the judge's job is to uphold the law, and not to create new law nor to ignore laws that he/she does not like, why then is this so complicated? It would seem (to me, a lay person), that the judge would look at those laws, and say, "well, this is what the law says!" And that would be it. But obviously not. What am I missing here?
Thanks in advance.
Hope this is ok to post this. I am not in need of assistance here, but was wondering if someone can set me straight on the law, and how things work in the judicial system. And assuming this thread is ok, please let's not turn this into a political discussion, and debate whether the President is right or wrong from a moral perspective; I am inquiring to satisfy my curiosity about the law and the courts.
I have not read the exec. order, but I have read the law dealing with immigration, which seems to suggest that the exec. order is legal. USC 1182 sec. (f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President - seems to suggest that the President may suspend entry to this country of anyone, if he feels such entry would be detrimental to the interests of the USA.
Plus, there is the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1952 which allows the President to place a temporary restriction on immigration based on country of origin, which further seems to support the President's authority here.
So, I question what grounds any judge has to stay the ban - if the judge's job is to uphold the law, and not to create new law nor to ignore laws that he/she does not like, why then is this so complicated? It would seem (to me, a lay person), that the judge would look at those laws, and say, "well, this is what the law says!" And that would be it. But obviously not. What am I missing here?
Thanks in advance.
Other Issues: Inquiry of Trump's Travel Ban - Curiousity
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire