4 ms·
He's not resorting to an executive order to ignore the law. He's using the loophole in the law that allows him to grant a 1-time 90 day lift of the ban, given t
by PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
He's not resorting to an executive order to ignore the law. He's using the loophole in the law that allows him to grant a 1-time 90 day lift of the ban, given that he certifies that certain conditions have been met.
The conditions have not been met, but he will lie and state that to his satisfaction, they have. Nothing will happen to challenge that except some noise from a couple of Democratic senators.
What happens 90 days later is anyone's guess.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> using the loophole in the law that allows him to grant a 1-time 90 day lift of the ban It's not a loophole, it's a clear power granted--with strict limits--within the scope of a short bill.
- blackeyeblitzar 2y agoThen why does it need an executive order? And doesn’t “certify” mean more than just “claim”?
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> why does it need an executive order? It doesn't. That's Trump being Trump. > doesn’t “certify” mean more than just “claim”? Not to my knowledge.
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y agoSure, the loophole is a part of the law, as I (and others) stated. Congress passed the law, which included a simple and easy way for a president to suspend it once of 90 day, with weak and unenforceable requirements to invoke it. Given that this is an unusual clause to have in a law, I feel comfortable calling it a loophole.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> the loophole is a part of the law That's not a loophole. It was intentionally designed the way it's been written to be used the way Trump is using it--to give the President leverage and the ability to save face for Beijing.
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y agoYou're saying it is not possible to build a loophole into a law. I'm saying that it is.