TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker and becoming a Supporting Member. For more info: Support TMC

Why wasn't Tesla part of the 100 Tech Companies Signing against the Travel Ban?

Discussion in 'Tesla Motors' started by apples1, Feb 6, 2017.

  1. jeffro01

    jeffro01 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,397
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    It must be hard living in so much fear of something that's so statistically unlikely to ever harm you...

    Jeff
     
    • Like x 3
  2. ModelX

    ModelX Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2012
    Messages:
    993
    Sounds like they are going back and revising the EO now; this time with more help from the DOJ.
     
    • Like x 1
  3. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    2,261
    Location:
    Norco, CA
    I've not added any new meanings for the word snowflake. Wrong person.

    And I don't think Donald Trump was the best choice for the POTUS.

    I object to many of the 9th decisions historically, and this is just another. If the decision stands, every word you've said in your life supersedes any action you take in the eyes of the court. This applies to the rest of your life.

    I object to comparing visa restrictions to false imprisonment of US citizens on US soil.

    I object to claiming that all laws are invalid that have metrics associated with them.

    I object to the concept that the US must only act upon successful attacks from foreign nationals on US soil. That a pattern of violence globally is not enough to designate somebody as dangerous.

    These are educated people acting in an uneducated manner. Perhaps stupid is harse, but their inability to realize what their words mean to future decisions is the best possible reason. Lack of knowledge is far better than political reasons, or outside financial interests. Washington and SF both have wealthy companies that desire more H1b visas.
     
    • Like x 4
  4. bonnie

    bonnie Oil is for sissies.

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Messages:
    14,586
    Location:
    Columbia River Gorge
    Just for the record, I appreciate this kind of thoughtful post from you. Even though I don't agree with everything, still giving you a 'like' because this is the kind of thing that contributes to a good discussion. :)
     
    • Like x 5
    • Love x 1
  5. Red Sage

    Red Sage The Cybernetic Samurai

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2014
    Messages:
    2,828
    Location:
    Los Angeles CA
    Heh. To actually make it legal, they'll do best to prepare a draft of a new Executive Order that does not require the signature of Barack Hussein Obama, but otherwise reads the same as the one that did, apart from the date, of course.
     
    • Like x 3
  6. sitter_k

    sitter_k Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2014
    Messages:
    457
    Location:
    Toronto (GTA)
    The siege, just got a lot closer to real life. Treating Muslims with suspicion in that movie was based on multiple attacks which lead to extreme measures, bigotry and panic. In real life bigotry and panic leading to extreme measures, and hopefully not a terrorist attack.
     
    • Like x 1
  7. sitter_k

    sitter_k Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2014
    Messages:
    457
    Location:
    Toronto (GTA)
    Yup bribery for sure, judges are on the take, check if any of them are of Mexican heritage btw.
     
    • Funny x 3
  8. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    2,261
    Location:
    Norco, CA
    While it is highly unlikely, bribery and judges have a long history together, globally. Until they make it a Capital Offense, some of it will always exist.

    Example you might know of:

    Immigration judge found guilty in sex bribery case
     
  9. Tam

    Tam Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,572
    Location:
    Visalia, CA
    What are Trump's 4 options?

    1. Supreme Court:

    Most likely will result in 4-4 which will refer back to lower court ruling.

    2. En Banc:

    An "en banc" appeal, in front of 11 judges, not just the last limited numbers of 3 judges.

    A majority vote from 29 active judges is needed to approve an "en banc".

    Both teams to get their briefs in by Thursday, 2/16/2017.

    3. Go back to Washington court:

    Go back to judge Robart who issued a TRO against Trump's executive order.

    Both sides have until Friday, 2/17/2017 to file their motions.

    4. New executive order
     
    • Like x 1
  10. msnow

    msnow Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2015
    Messages:
    4,773
    Location:
    SoCal
    Looks like he's decided to do a combination of the above. Create a new EO while continuing to fight it in court.
     
  11. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    2,261
    Location:
    Norco, CA
    5. Abandon the policy is another option. Presidents seldom keep campaign promises historically, nor do they deal with external threats until after a major event no matter how much warning they have. This is the path most Presidents in the last 100 years have taken when rebuked.

    6. Take a lesson from the Democrat Party. When halted for exceeding Executive Branch constitutional limitations, FDR tried to dissolve the existing Supreme Court who voted against him by salting it with filler judges. Just the threat was enough to make the SCOTUS reverse their decision. But he also threw Americans who were perceived as a national threat due to their heritage in "prison". Something that was unique in US history and what the 9th now considers to be identical to immigration control of foreign nationals.

    7. By letting the 9th decision stand, it can be used to attack enemy of the RNC. By using quotes from DNC members to invalid any of their legislation or authority based on ill-intent from conversations. It also allows them to invalidate any DNC policies that involve a date.
     
  12. Chopr147

    Chopr147 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,342
    Location:
    Wantagh, NY
    And this is the problem right there! On many case we can take an educated guess on which way the court will rule. After they pretend to closely examine a case they will then vote the way we knew from the beginning :(
     
    • Disagree x 1
  13. msnow

    msnow Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2015
    Messages:
    4,773
    Location:
    SoCal
    Just not true. How come you guys always blame the judges and not the bad law they may be reviewing. Even the most conservative district courts get overturned nearly 70% of the time. This is a time to be proud of our judicial system not slam it.
     
    • Like x 1
  14. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    2,261
    Location:
    Norco, CA
    Do you not find absoluteness suspicious in anything dealing with opinions and humans?

    Every point the State of Washington put forth was unanimously accepted, every point the USA put up was unanimously rejected. Even to the level of absurdity. Explain how imprisoning American citizens for an indefinite term with no due process based solely on where their parents were born is like visa delays involving foreign national for a specific duration. Not "implied" either, explicit in ink, in the Four Corners.

    Please explain to me how the two issues relate. I can't see it as anything but ignorant or malicious. I hope it's just ignorance.

    It should have made every judge in the USA cringe and hide their faces that a High Court would behave like such amateurs.
     
  15. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    2,261
    Location:
    Norco, CA
    To achieve parity, the POTUS would have to write an EO that said:

    "Every American or legal resident, who can trace any of their ancestry to Syria, will be imprisoned until we determine this order will end. They will have no legal recourse to question this ruling, even if they do not actually have Syrian ancestors. The opinion of the Government as to their heritage is final and binding."
     
  16. Tam

    Tam Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    Messages:
    1,572
    Location:
    Visalia, CA
    Citing Japanese Internment seems to be an advantage for Trump's defense.

    The Supreme Court upheld that Japanese Internment is constitutional regardless of citizenship even when it targets specific nationality/race/ethnic origins due to national security.

    It seems that the Supreme Court says it is totally legal to practice racism, discrimination, bigotry... as long as the court can agree that it's about national security.

    The problem with Trump right now is how he can recruit sympathetic judges for the court hearings who would agree that his order is "unreviewable" because it's all about national security.

    Can Trump order the boss of those judges to fire all those unsympathetic judges just like the way he easily could with Acting General Attorney Yates?
     
  17. Red Sage

    Red Sage The Cybernetic Samurai

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2014
    Messages:
    2,828
    Location:
    Los Angeles CA
    #137 Red Sage, Feb 11, 2017
    Last edited: Feb 11, 2017
    There was a congressionally approved war against Japan during that interment, which took place around two decades before the Equal Rights Amendment was passed. Racial bias is no longer allowed as a convenient excuse. The Supreme Court must rule on the current state of Constitutional Law, not archaic versions.

    The U.S. is not currently at war with any of the seven nations in question. If we are (or should be), then the POTUS should make a plea to Capitol Hill to make such a formal declaration on those nations he deems an imminent threat detrimental to our nation. That is to say, if President Trump wants to truly demonstrate that a 'War on Terrorism' requires a 'War on Muslim Nations', he should say so to the American public and an open session of both Houses of Congress.

    The fun thing, of course, is that for much of the last fifty years or so every 'War on...' something or other has been fought in precisely the manner needed to perpetuate it, instead of ending them. Think about it. Cold War on Communism (Russia failed fifteen or twenty years ahead of schedule, and President George Herbert Walker Bush had to swiftly come up with some convenient excuse for continued military buildup -- because they didn't povide us with the planned war that had been expected for decades -- those bastards). War on Poverty. War on Illiteracy. War on Crime. War on Drugs. War on Hunger. War on Racism. War on Terrorism. Not one won yet, or ever. Hmmm... Maybe the U.S. should stop declaring wars on stuff, and see what happens?
     
  18. msnow

    msnow Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2015
    Messages:
    4,773
    Location:
    SoCal
    Not true. During the oral arguments all three challenged the Washington attorney
    about standing, who and how were citizens harmed by the order and the legal theory to refute the Presidents authority to issue the Order. The Republican judge was particularly sceptical of the Washington arguments. In the end I'm sure they thought it would be better to keep things status quo until the evidence could be developed by the original Federal judge.
    Also, I don't think the governments advocate was all that good.
     
  19. msnow

    msnow Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2015
    Messages:
    4,773
    Location:
    SoCal
    No, they are appointed for life.
     
    • Informative x 1
  20. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    2,261
    Location:
    Norco, CA
    One EO specifically says to discriminate against Americans and existing legal residents based on heritage by imprisonment for an undetermined amount of time.

    Another says specifically to restrict visas from 7 countries based on the country. One country for an undetermined amount of time, the others for a defined amount of time. No imprisonment and no heritage, religious, or racial guidelines whatsoever.

    In any case, it would be sweet if the American Left would simply be brave enough to believe in their rhetoric and use the 2nd Amendment to resolve these intense grievances they have against America. I have a pretty good idea how that would end, and how quickly.
     

Share This Page