 |
|
RE: Was this the court that was supposed to rule in
Posted on: May 25, 2017 at 14:22:10 CT
Silas MU
Posts:
12320
Member For:
8.33 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
A Virginia-based federal appeals court rejected President Donald Trump's request to reinstate his revised executive order on immigration, saying the president likely acted with improper motives when seeking to temporarily bar U.S. entry for travelers from six Muslim-majority countries.
"We find that the reasonable observer would likely conclude that [the executive order's] primary purpose is to exclude persons from the United States on the basis of their religious beliefs," Chief Judge Roger Gregory wrote in an opinion for the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond.
The ruling is another in a series of legal setbacks for the White House. It potentially sets the stage for review by the Supreme Court if the president makes good on his earlier pledge to appeal to the high court.
"We find that the reasonable observer would likely conclude that [the executive order's] primary purpose is to exclude persons from the United States on the basis of their religious beliefs," Chief Judge Roger Gregory wrote in an opinion for the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond.
The ruling is another in a series of legal setbacks for the White House. It potentially sets the stage for review by the Supreme Court if the president makes good on his earlier pledge to appeal to the high court.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
- 
RE: Was this the court that was supposed to rule in - Silas MU - 5/25 14:22:10