Why did the 9th Circuit court ignore 8 U.S. Code § 1182?

[OriZ 3,157]

12 minutes ago, aaron2020 said:

Bibi is also a fascist.  The wall around the West Bank looks fantastic.  World's largest concentration camp.  You are right, we shouldn't antagonize Israel over this or building illegal settlements which violates international laws, UN resolutions, and human rights.

 

[OriZ 3,157]

56 minutes ago, Merle said:

That wasn't my point. NK and Iran were doing the same stuff under Obama that they are doing now. Obama had no problem antagonizing Israel as well. The last I checked they are one of our biggest allies in that part of the world. Do I need to post proof?

It looks like this ain't gonna go nowhere lol. Some people are stuck in their ways and don't want to see the light.

[OriZ 3,157]

Mmmmm....UN resolutions...best toilet paper ever.

[CaliCat 3,957]

23 hours ago, jg121783 said:

8 U.S. Code § 1182 states the following;

 

“Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”

 

Seems pretty easy to understand to me. Even a 10 year old could understand it. So why couldn't the 9th Circuit court understand it? This type of legislating from the bench is why 80% of their rulings are overturned. 

 

A 10-year-old would also understand that 1182 has nothing to do with the Muslim ban. That may be one of the reasons not many 10-yo are protesting in favor of the so-called president.

[aaron2020 11,651]

1 hour ago, OriZ said:

Mmmmm....UN resolutions...best toilet paper ever.

Said the Israeli while UN resolutions supported by nations of the world condemn illegal settlements in occupied land.

[OriZ 3,157]

4 hours ago, aaron2020 said:

Said the Israeli while UN resolutions supported by nations of the world condemn illegal settlements in occupied land.

Sorry, lookup the definition of occupied, it had to be legally owned by someone first. I thought you claimed to be good at all this law thing?

Edited February 13, 2017 by OriZ

[aaron2020 11,651]

18 minutes ago, OriZ said:

Sorry, lookup the definition of occupied, it had to be legally owned by someone first. I thought you claimed to be good at all this law thing?

Where did I claimed to be good at all this law thing?  You are lying.

 

Stop lying.  Even the Israeli Supreme Court calls the West Bank an occupied territory.  But you are so much smarter than them, right?  What do the best judges in Israel know about law?  

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank#cite_note-FD-8

Legal status

 

---

Boundaries defined in the 1947 UN Partition Plan for Palestine:
 

  Area assigned for a Jewish state;

    Area assigned for an Arab state;

    Planned Corpus separatum with the intention that Jerusalem would be neither Jewish nor Arab

---

Armistice Demarcation Lines of 1949:
 

      Israeli controlled territory from 1949;

    Arab controlled territory until 1967

From 1517 to 1917 the West Bank was part of the Ottoman Empire. Turkey, successor state to the Ottoman Empire, renounced its territorial claims in 1923, signing the Treaty of Lausanne, and the area now called the West Bank became an integral part of the British Mandate for Palestine. During the Mandate period Britain had no right of sovereignty, which was held by the people under the mandate.^[24] Nevertheless, Britain, as custodians of the land, implemented the land tenure laws in Palestine, which it had inherited from the Ottoman Turks (as defined in the Ottoman Land Code of 1858), applying these laws unto, both, Arab and Jewish legal tenants or otherwise.^[25] In 1947 the UN General Assembly recommended that the area that became the West Bank become part of a future Arab state, but this proposal was opposed by the Arab states at the time. In 1948, Jordan occupied the West Bank and annexed it in 1950.^[14]

In 1967, Israel captured the West Bank from Jordan in the Six-Day War. UN Security Council Resolution 242 that followed called for withdrawal from territories occupied in the conflict in exchange for peace and mutual recognition. Since 1979 the United Nations Security Council,^[26] the United Nations General Assembly,^[21] the United States,^[27] the EU,^[28] the International Court of Justice,^[29] and the International Committee of the Red Cross^[30] refer to the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, as occupied Palestinian territory or the occupied territories. General Assembly resolution 58/292 (17 May 2004) affirmed that the Palestinian people have the right to sovereignty over the area.^[31]

The International Court of Justice and the Supreme Court of Israel have ruled that the status of the West Bank is that of military occupation.^[8] In its 2004 advisory opinion the International Court of Justice concluded that:

The territories situated between the Green Line and the former eastern boundary of Palestine under the Mandate were occupied by Israel in 1967 during the armed conflict between Israel and Jordan. Under customary international law, the Court observes, these were therefore occupied territories in which Israel had the status of occupying Power. Subsequent events in these territories have done nothing to alter this situation. The Court concludes that all these territories (including East Jerusalem) remain occupied territories and that Israel has continued to have the status of occupying Power.^[8][9]

In the same vein the Israeli Supreme Court stated in the 2004 Beit Sourik case that:

The general point of departure of all parties – which is also our point of departure – is that Israel holds the area in belligerent occupation (occupatio bellica)......The authority of the military commander flows from the provisions of public international law regarding belligerent occupation. These rules are established principally in the Regulations Concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land, The Hague, 18 October 1907 [hereinafter – the Hague Regulations]. These regulations reflect customary international law. The military commander’s authority is also anchored in IV Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War 1949.^[8][32]

The executive branch of the Israeli government, through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, has defined the West Bank as disputed territory, whose status can only be determined through negotiations. The Ministry says that occupied territories are territories captured in war from an established and recognized sovereign, and that since the West Bank wasn't under the legitimate and recognized sovereignty of any state prior to the Six-Day War, it shouldn't be considered an occupied territory.^[23]

The International Court of Justice ruling of 9 July 2004, however, found that the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, is territory held by Israel under military occupation, regardless of its status prior to it coming under Israeli occupation and the Fourth Geneva convention applies de jure.^[33] The international community regards the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) as territories occupied by Israel.^[34]

International law (Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention) prohibits "transfers of the population of an occupying power to occupied territories", incurring a responsibility on the part of Israel's government to not settle Israeli citizens in the West Bank.^[35]

As of 27 September 2013, 134 (69.4%) of the 193 member states of the United Nations have recognised the State of Palestine^[36] within the Palestinian territories, which are recognized by Israel to constitute a single territorial unit,^[37][38] and of which the West Bank is the core of the would-be state.^[39]

Edited February 13, 2017 by aaron2020

[OriZ 3,157]

1 hour ago, aaron2020 said:

Where did I claimed to be good at all this law thing?  You are lying.

 

Stop lying.  Even the Israeli Supreme Court calls the West Bank an occupied territory.  But you are so much smarter than them, right?  What do the best judges in Israel know about law?  

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank#cite_note-FD-8

Legal status

 

---

Boundaries defined in the 1947 UN Partition Plan for Palestine:
 

  Area assigned for a Jewish state;

    Area assigned for an Arab state;

    Planned Corpus separatum with the intention that Jerusalem would be neither Jewish nor Arab

---

Armistice Demarcation Lines of 1949:
 

      Israeli controlled territory from 1949;

    Arab controlled territory until 1967

From 1517 to 1917 the West Bank was part of the Ottoman Empire. Turkey, successor state to the Ottoman Empire, renounced its territorial claims in 1923, signing the Treaty of Lausanne, and the area now called the West Bank became an integral part of the British Mandate for Palestine. During the Mandate period Britain had no right of sovereignty, which was held by the people under the mandate.^[24] Nevertheless, Britain, as custodians of the land, implemented the land tenure laws in Palestine, which it had inherited from the Ottoman Turks (as defined in the Ottoman Land Code of 1858), applying these laws unto, both, Arab and Jewish legal tenants or otherwise.^[25] In 1947 the UN General Assembly recommended that the area that became the West Bank become part of a future Arab state, but this proposal was opposed by the Arab states at the time. In 1948, Jordan occupied the West Bank and annexed it in 1950.^[14]

In 1967, Israel captured the West Bank from Jordan in the Six-Day War. UN Security Council Resolution 242 that followed called for withdrawal from territories occupied in the conflict in exchange for peace and mutual recognition. Since 1979 the United Nations Security Council,^[26] the United Nations General Assembly,^[21] the United States,^[27] the EU,^[28] the International Court of Justice,^[29] and the International Committee of the Red Cross^[30] refer to the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, as occupied Palestinian territory or the occupied territories. General Assembly resolution 58/292 (17 May 2004) affirmed that the Palestinian people have the right to sovereignty over the area.^[31]

The International Court of Justice and the Supreme Court of Israel have ruled that the status of the West Bank is that of military occupation.^[8] In its 2004 advisory opinion the International Court of Justice concluded that:

The territories situated between the Green Line and the former eastern boundary of Palestine under the Mandate were occupied by Israel in 1967 during the armed conflict between Israel and Jordan. Under customary international law, the Court observes, these were therefore occupied territories in which Israel had the status of occupying Power. Subsequent events in these territories have done nothing to alter this situation. The Court concludes that all these territories (including East Jerusalem) remain occupied territories and that Israel has continued to have the status of occupying Power.^[8][9]

In the same vein the Israeli Supreme Court stated in the 2004 Beit Sourik case that:

The general point of departure of all parties – which is also our point of departure – is that Israel holds the area in belligerent occupation (occupatio bellica)......The authority of the military commander flows from the provisions of public international law regarding belligerent occupation. These rules are established principally in the Regulations Concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land, The Hague, 18 October 1907 [hereinafter – the Hague Regulations]. These regulations reflect customary international law. The military commander’s authority is also anchored in IV Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War 1949.^[8][32]

The executive branch of the Israeli government, through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, has defined the West Bank as disputed territory, whose status can only be determined through negotiations. The Ministry says that occupied territories are territories captured in war from an established and recognized sovereign, and that since the West Bank wasn't under the legitimate and recognized sovereignty of any state prior to the Six-Day War, it shouldn't be considered an occupied territory.^[23]

The International Court of Justice ruling of 9 July 2004, however, found that the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, is territory held by Israel under military occupation, regardless of its status prior to it coming under Israeli occupation and the Fourth Geneva convention applies de jure.^[33] The international community regards the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) as territories occupied by Israel.^[34]

International law (Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention) prohibits "transfers of the population of an occupying power to occupied territories", incurring a responsibility on the part of Israel's government to not settle Israeli citizens in the West Bank.^[35]

As of 27 September 2013, 134 (69.4%) of the 193 member states of the United Nations have recognised the State of Palestine^[36] within the Palestinian territories, which are recognized by Israel to constitute a single territorial unit,^[37][38] and of which the West Bank is the core of the would-be state.^[39]

Thanks for the wall of text but this is an old conversation I don't feel like rehashing.

[Merle 458]

10 hours ago, aaron2020 said:

Bibi is also a fascist.  The wall around the West Bank looks fantastic.  World's largest concentration camp.  

I can see any further dicussion with you would be a waste of time. 

[aaron2020 11,651]

Can't handle cited facts?  

 

Enjoy your alternate realities.

 

Thank you for playing.

[CaliCat 3,957]

51 minutes ago, aaron2020 said:

Can't handle cited facts?  

 

Enjoy your alternate realities.

 

Thank you for playing.

 

Reality is so 2016. We now live in an alternative facts world. The so-called president doesn't seem to understand how the constitution works, and everyone is at fault, except for him. 

[Merle 458]

1 hour ago, CaliCat said:

 

Reality is so 2016. We now live in an alternative facts world. The so-called president doesn't seem to understand how the constitution works, and everyone is at fault, except for him. 

Im still waiting for your proof that illegals voted Trump into office.

[Merle 458]

2 hours ago, aaron2020 said:

Can't handle cited facts?  

 

Enjoy your alternate realities.

 

Thank you for playing.

Have you ever seen pictures of a concentration camp? If so you might want to look into that and then maybe you'll see it's you living in an alternate facts world.

[OriZ 3,157]

3 hours ago, Merle said:

Have you ever seen pictures of a concentration camp? If so you might want to look into that and then maybe you'll see it's you living in an alternate facts world.

 

Somebody should remind people that concentration camps are meant to keep people in, not out, and conversely walls are meant to keep people out, not in.

 

Seriously though, as soon as they bring up concentration camps they instantly lose me to the conversation. You can't seriously discuss anything with people like that.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

3 hours ago, Merle said:

Im still waiting for your proof that illegals voted Trump into office.

And the Federal Election Committee is waiting for Team Trump to provide any proof illegal alien voter fraud cost him the popular vote. Sorry but Team Trump goes first in needing to provide proof, and realistically voter supression (his ulterior motive for crying voter fraud) is more likely what got Trump elected. He needs voter supression in four years to get re-elected, assuming he doesn't start WW3 or get impeached in that time frame.