Trump “travel ban” ALLOWED by US Supreme Court

As we suspected, there is Fake Law as well as Fake News.

The lower federal courts who consistently and in a clearly-biased fashion continuously overturned President Trump’s so-called “travel ban” from dangerous Middle Eastern countries in order to more closely attempt to vet who is allowed into the United States have had their rulings overturned today — Monday — by the US Supreme Court.

From CNBC.com:

Supreme Court allows President Trump’s travel ban to go fully into effect

  • The Supreme Court is allowing President Donald Trump’s latest travel ban on six Muslim-majority nations to go into effect.
  • Two of the nine justices — Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor — dissented.
  • The ban applies to travelers from Chad, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen

The Supreme Court is allowing the Trump administration to fully enforce a ban on travel to the United States by residents of six mostly Muslim countries.

The justices, with two dissenting votes, said Monday that the policy can take full effect even as legal challenges against it make their way through the courts. The action suggests the high court could uphold the latest version of the ban that Trump announced in September.

The ban applies to travelers from Chad, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen. Lower courts had said people from those nations with a claim of a “bona fide” relationship with someone in the United States could not be kept out of the country. Grandparents, cousins and other relatives were among those courts said could not be excluded.

What the American Media Maggots will not, trust me, emphasize is that this was a 7 to 2 ruling, meaning that damned near all jurists ruled in favor of the travel ban.

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor would have left the lower court orders in place.

That means Kennedy, Breyer and Kagan — liberal and swing members — voted in favor of affirming the travel ban. We now know where Ginsburg and Sotomayor side.

Ginsburg was a dissenting vote because it’s what she does. We expect no less. Sotomayor voted as a dissent because she is a supporter of illegals — it’s that simple.

Finally, an indicator that the United States federal judiciary has not gone totally off the rails.

BZ

 

One new win for the 2nd Amendment

At a time when we in the United States find the Second Amendment challenged on any number of levels, most certainly in blue states like Fornicalia, and when any number of citizens in Europe wish they had their own version of the Second Amendment, there comes the occasional federal ruling chalked up into the “win” column.

Such was a recent opinion this past week.

From TheHill.com:

Federal court strikes down DC anti-concealed carry law

by Josh Delk

A federal appeals court reportedly ruled on Tuesday that a Washington, D.C., law requiring people to prove they have “proper reason” for a concealed-carry gun permit is unconstitutional.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that the law, which requires people to show “proper reason to fear injury” in order to carry a firearm, is unconstitutional and a violation of D.C. residents’ Second Amendment rights. 

Let’s remember this, shall we? The DC Court of Appeals is the second most powerful court in the nation, directly behind SCOTUS.

According to the law, acceptable reasons to get a permit included jobs that required employees to protect valuables or if an individual had been threatened. 

Hello? Earth to Common Sense? For once we appear to be communicating.

Nothing succeeds like success.

BZ

 

SCOTUS ruling on the First Amendment

Sadly, this slipped by me until now.

The US Supreme just recently released a terribly important opinion on a First Amendment case,

One that will and has upset and pissed off Leftists nationally and globally.

From the WashingtonPost.com:

Supreme Court unanimously reaffirms: There is no ‘hate speech’ exception to the First Amendment

by Eugene Volokh

From today’s opinion by Justice Samuel Alito (for four justices) in Matal v. Tam, the “Slants” case:

[The idea that the government may restrict] speech expressing ideas that offend … strikes at the heart of the First Amendment. Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express “the thought that we hate.”

Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote separately, also for four justices, but on this point the opinions agreed:

A law found to discriminate based on viewpoint is an “egregious form of content discrimination,” which is “presumptively unconstitutional.” … A law that can be directed against speech found offensive to some portion of the public can be turned against minority and dissenting views to the detriment of all. The First Amendment does not entrust that power to the government’s benevolence. Instead, our reliance must be on the substantial safeguards of free and open discussion in a democratic society.

Yes. You read that right. This was a unanimous decision, 8 to 0 (Neil Gorsuch was not on the court when the case was argued). The US Supreme Court incontrovertibly and undeniably upheld our right to free speech. Even the Leftists.

How sad to think that I would — even for one moment — be concerned about this case, as clear to me as it appeared.

And the justices made clear that speech that some view as racially offensive is protected not just against outright prohibition but also against lesser restrictions. In Matal, the government refused to register “The Slants” as a band’s trademark, on the ground that the name might be seen as demeaning to Asian Americans. The government wasn’t trying to forbid the band from using the mark; it was just denying it certain protections that trademarks get against unauthorized use by third parties. But even in this sort of program, the court held, viewpoint discrimination — including against allegedly racially offensive viewpoints — is unconstitutional. And this no-viewpoint-discrimination principle has long been seen as applying to exclusion of speakers from universities, denial of tax exemptions to nonprofits, and much more.

In other words, speech that simply makes you “uncomfortable” and prompts you to head for your “safe space” is still protected speech in these United States of America, no matter what anyone happens to say or think on US college campuses.

I wonder, however, what would happen if I were to attempt to register “The Crackas” as my band’s trademark when it consisted of all Caucasoids?

Oh yes. This: not one fuck given or one shit proffered.

GOWPs. Guilty Overeducated White People.

Even Noam Chomsky believes in free speech, and on campuses.

My final comment: were you aware that the United States of America is one of the very, very few Western Civilization countries left that does not have a “hate speech” law guaranteeing prosecution of that vastly nebulous phrase?

Be thankful.

Be very, very thankful.

But be very, very mindful.

BZ

 

US Kabuki Theater Pt VIII:

This is the continuation of a series of posts dealing with issues where some individuals in the United States government are attempting to hold at least a portion of the rest of the federal government accountable and responsible for its actions and inactions. The public displays we find, however, are not unlike the most bizarre of Kabuki Theater or Theater of the Absurd.

Here, the late Justice Antonin Scalia speaks with Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday regarding originalism, textualism, purposivism and gun control.

This is just 1/9th of 1/3rd of our government confirming and upholding our basic freedoms. Further, let me state: this is the best of our government in action. Our government at work. What we pay it to do.

Please remember, ladies and gentlemen, these are your federal tax dollars either

  1. At work, or
  2. Pissed away with abandon

More to come.

BZ

 

BZ’s Berserk Bobcat Saloon, Tuesday, June 27th, 2017, with guest White Mamba, Esq.

My thanks to the SHR Media Network for allowing me to broadcast in their studio and over their air twice weekly, Tuesdays and Thursdays, as well as appear on the Sack Heads Radio Show™ each Wednesday evening.

Featured in the Saloon tonight was the White Mamba, Esq., The Official Attorney of the Berserk Bobcat Saloon, otherwise known at TOABBS. Because of his lawyerliness (yes, that is an official word), I asked him to weigh in on the recent events of the US Supreme Court this week, to include the opinion on the Trump travel ban and two other important SCOTUS cases.

Tonight in the Saloon:

  • “I’d like to have an argument, please,” at the Argument Clinic;
  • “I could be arguing in my spare time.”
  • Jealousy: a buddy is moving to Montana; I’m not. That says it all. Harumph!
  • CNN is having a bad week; schadenfreude returns with a vengeance;
  • Shuckie-darn, 3 CNN Fake Newsies resign, axed by CNN CEO Jeff Zucker;
  • Three things more trusted than CNN:
  • —- Breast milk from Bruce Jenner;
  • —- Unprotected sex with Madonna;
  • —- Having a drink with Bill Cosby;
  • James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas skewers CNN; they admit they are Fake News;
  • CNN does NOT refute the Project Veritas video; that bespeaks volumes;
  • White Mamba, Esq opines on all things SCOTUS;
  • Demorats register the “wrong dead people” in Virginia;
  • Judge Napolitano: Loretta Lynch could do serious prison time;
  • Piers Morgan skewers Muslim London Mayor Sadiq Khan.

If you care to listen to the show in Spreaker, please click on start.

Listen to “BZ’s Berserk Bobcat Saloon, Tuesday, June 27th, 2017” on Spreaker.

If you care to watch the show on YouTube, please likewise click on start.

New programming note: beginning this Thursday, June 29th, Dan Butcher of High Plains Pundit fame will be featured as a regular guest every Thursday night here in the Saloon. I am pleased to welcome Dan to the show because he himself is such a stellar media figure. You can find him here at High Plains Pundit, here at High Plains Talk Radio, here on Facebook, and here on Twitter. Don’t miss Dan’s intelligent and insightful commentary, live and direct from the Lone Star state of Texas, every Thursday in the Saloon.

Please join me, the Bloviating Zeppelin (on Twitter @BZep and on Gab.ai @BZep), every Tuesday and Thursday night on the SHR Media Network from 11 PM to 1 AM Eastern and 8 PM to 10 PM Pacific, at the Berserk Bobcat Saloon — where the speech is free but the drinks are not.

As ever, thank you so kindly for listening, commenting, and interacting in the chat room or listening later via podcast.

Want to listen to all the Berserk Bobcat Saloon archives in podcast? Go here. Want to watch the past shows on YouTube? Please visit the SHR Media Network YouTube channel here.

BZ