HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Appeals court sides with ...

Mon Feb 11, 2019, 06:53 PM

Appeals court sides with Trump in border wall dispute

Source: The Hill

President Trump on Monday notched a rare victory in the California-based federal appeals court by winning a dispute over the construction of certain barriers along small stretches of the U.S. border with Mexico.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court ruling that sided with the Trump administration in a lawsuit challenging its authority to waive environmental and public participation laws to expedite the border construction projects.

A three-judge panel ruled 2-1 that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has broad authority under the Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 to construct wall "prototypes, replace 14 miles of primary fencing near San Diego and replace similar fencing along a three-mile strip close to Calexico, Calif.

A coalition of environmental groups, led by the Center for Biological Diversity, challenged the authority of DHS to waive dozens of laws, including the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, to make it easier to build the border infrastructure. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D) also filed suit.

-snip-

BY LYDIA WHEELER AND TIMOTHY CAMA - 02/11/19 01:57 PM EST


Read more: https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/429444-appeals-court-sides-with-trump-in-border-wall-prototype-dispute



Related: In Re Border Infrastructure Environmental Litigation (U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals)

7 replies, 1479 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 7 replies Author Time Post
Reply Appeals court sides with Trump in border wall dispute (Original post)
Eugene Feb 11 OP
bluestarone Feb 11 #1
humbled_opinion Feb 11 #2
Eliot Rosewater Feb 11 #3
Rocky888 Feb 11 #4
forgotmylogin Feb 11 #5
mr_lebowski Feb 12 #7
Apollyonus Feb 11 #6

Response to Eugene (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2019, 07:03 PM

1. BULLSHIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sometimes i CANNOT believe some of these fucking decisions!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eugene (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2019, 07:16 PM

2. Terrible Decision

Worse it will be used as catalyst to bolster his national emergency declaration making it harder for a court to argue he doesn't have authority to build the wall.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eugene (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2019, 07:32 PM

3. This is the court rump is going to appoint sycophant traitors to real soon. right?

There is a difference between something that is upheld as legal and something that should never be done in the first place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eliot Rosewater (Reply #3)

Mon Feb 11, 2019, 08:55 PM

4. Every judge and prosecutor's electronic devices are vulnerable to hacking by bad actors

Around the world that want something from this orange creature and his despicable family making
Every judges and prosecutors decision questionable. Trump did away with our cyber protection intelligence for this very reason. I hope Im wrong, but just observing the actions of so many of our politicians and others in high office sure makes the hair on my neck stand up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eugene (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2019, 09:47 PM

5. Devil's Advocate:

Except for building his "prototypes" for his little fence-reality competition show, it looks like this all says "replace" existing fencing, which I thought wasn't the problem... as opposed to seizing land where there isn't fence and building it.

What am I missing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forgotmylogin (Reply #5)

Tue Feb 12, 2019, 12:40 AM

7. Unless there's more to it, nothing. You actually read and comprehended the OP. Well done :) (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eugene (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2019, 11:06 PM

6. The plaintiffs will ask for a full panel review

 

Of the three judges, two could be Trump-appointed. When the full bench hears the appeal, the results may be different.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread