Wednesday, January 10, 2018

What's Next? At Trial Level, In Muslim Ban 3.0 -- In Federal Court In Maryland...


While we await a published opinion on the appeal now pending in the Fourth Circuit, and any additional action by the US Supreme Court, on the Ninth Circuit decision now pending on a motion before the Supremes. . . I thought I'd follow the intervening briefing schedule, down in Maryland.

So here that is, in full:

. . . .Government's Motion to Stay | January 19, 2018

Plaintiffs' Cross Motions for Entry of a
Scheduling Order and Memorandum of Law in
Opposition to the Government's Motion to Stay | February 2, 2018

Government's Reply Memorandum of Law in
Support of the Motion to Stay and
Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiffs'
Cross Motions for Entry of a Scheduling Order | February 9, 2018

Plaintiffs' Reply Memorandum of Law in Support
of the Cross Motions for Entry of a Scheduling Order | February 16, 2018. . . .


Now you know. Stay warm, as the rain turns to. . . ice storms and snow now, by Friday night. . . . in an entirely new, but justified and ancient -- "shape of water". . . smiling, widely but. . . wryly.

नमस्ते

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Stop calling it a Muslim ban. That is so transparent. There are 50 Muslim countries. This is a terrorist ban. These countries have funded and aided terrorism- and openly pray for our death. You must be Muslim to defend such heinous people. Any county should be allowed to protect itself from murderers without being called racist. That is the weakest argument and shows that the ban is the correct prescription to the disease. Unfortunately- it won’t do anything to stop all of the sleeper cells across the country. New Jersey alone has enough terrorists to endure death to innocent people for generations.

condor said...

Thanks Anon., for your thoughts. . . .

I’m afraid your argument suffers from the fallacy of composition.

No “Muslim” is inherently dangerous — unless US born white fundamental Christians (those toting automatic assault rifles) are inherently dangerous (in your eyes). Funny — where is your (and 45’s) ban, on them? Cue the crickets...

Banning a nation. . . is thus both illogical, ineffectual... and unconstitutional. And Trump has openly called for a Muslim Ban, in any event. Please address that. Wait — don’t bother. Yours won’t make any sense.

You are free to think such silly things, but (like Trump is learning day by day), in the courts — it is not the loudest voice that prevails. . . It is the Constitution — the rule of law, not tin pot despots.

I wish you well — despite your substantial confusion.

I will also put these comments up top today -/ so all may see them.

Namaste