Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:C-Suite Attitudes (Score 3, Insightful) 119

Dude, please! Grammar!

Twitter is a proper noun, so capitalize it. And there should be a comma between "Twitter" and "right". There should also be a comma between "petty" and "little", as they both are adjectives describing "bitch". And finally, some punctuation after the second sentence. From your tone I'd suggest an exclamation point, but a period could also be acceptable if you want to imply exasperation instead of passion.

Comment Toys, toys, toys... (Score 5, Insightful) 119

If the C-Suite wants to give the responsibility to IT for security decisions, they can start by losing their "I have to have this cool gadget, but there is no business justification" toys.

They can also stop demanding to be exceptions to any security policy that inconveniences them, like full-disk encryption, local administrative rights, multi-factor authentication and complex passwords.

Comment Re:Judge should learn the law (Score 1) 476

You and he are quite possibly correct.

After reading thru the TRO, it seems to rest on a violation of due process, which itself would be a violation of the 14th Amendment.

The fourteenth amendment to the constitution is not confined to the protection of only citizens. It says: "Nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

In short, the President seems to have the authority to such restrictions, however he must still follow due process. Anyone already issued valid visas, green cards, etc. can't be summarily barred by fiat and those permits can't be revoked without following the legal process.

Comment Re: Judge should learn the law (Score 1) 476

At this point we've strayed from the original comment, which was the judge didn't know the law and are down to opinions about whether the extent of the TRO was too broad.

I certainly see your point, but take a different position. i see the TRO as the only effective remedy simply because the Administration has been issued confusing and contradictory guidance so nobody really knows what it means. The TRO gives them time to get their shit together, and it can be lifted literally minutes after the Administration issues clear guidance that satisfies the judge in not being potentially illegal.

As you pointed out, the language of the EO itself seems to be perfectly fine (in our humble, non-legal scholar opinions). It is just the guidance given in its enforcement that seems to have caused all of the chaos and legal troubles.

Comment Re: Judge should learn the law (Score 1) 476

From your own quote they owe allegiance, even though only temporary.

The alien, while domiciled in the country, owes a local and temporary allegiance, which continues during the period of his residence. Carlisle v. U.S.

That quite possibly may be good enough, and would seem to need further clarification by the courts, which in turn along with the economic harm to the complainants, along with the demonstrated confusion by the Executive Branch, seems enough to justify the TRO.

Comment Re: Judge should learn the law (Score 1) 476

Third paragraph in the introduction section presented by the AG of WA directly address the impact on legal, permanent residents.

Note the AG only requested restraint on portions of the order. First paragraph, second to last sentence.

I followed the link to the PDF in the summary. Filename AGOWA-Trump-TRO.pdf

Comment Re: Judge should learn the law (Score 1) 476

I'm well aware of that section. It came up a great deal in Obama's initial election. However, when quoting law definitions you need to use the definitions given the in the same section of Law and not bounce around too much. Read the section I quoted. There's enough wiggle room in there that green card holders permanent residence, are considered Nationals.

This is why each major section of the US code starts out with definitions. You'll find a different definition in the IRS tax code section.

Comment Re: Judge should learn the law (Score 1) 476

By the poor interpretation of overzealous DHS and immigration agents border checkpoints. You're right that on its face it looks perfectly legal, however the guidance given was improper and was implemented improperly. The ruling may simply be not that the order is overturned but the way it's being handled by the people at the border needs to be changed.

Comment Re: Judge should learn the law (Score 1) 476

The complaint want exclusively based on H1-B visa holders. The judge doesn't have two faces ruling on everything just the totality. So he may look at it and say "something in this is going to stand, I'm not going to go through the details and tell you what will and what won't. Will let a full court do that."

You're right in assuming that part may not stand, but even that part is vague enough to warrant full heading by a court. That same section of law refers to refusing entry by refusing the issuance of visas. The assumption is if the visas were already issued, then due process must be followed to revoke them.

I'm not a lawyer, I've just worked with them for decades. And while I'm casually interested to see how this turns out, at this point I would have to start going through precedent to see where this is been ruled on in the past and I'm not that interested. :-)

Comment Re: Judge should learn the law (Score 1) 476

The judge has the ability to block the entire order by injunction until it can be properly heard by a court. It will be the court's decision on whether the entire thing is voided or only parts.

All this judge is saying is "wait -- you're right, this looks wrong on its face and you will suffer harm. I'll suspend it until we can go through the process and figure it all out."

The President could amend or clarify the order any time he wants to make it clear it is only aliens and the court case would probably be dismissed.

Slashdot Top Deals

The wages of sin are unreported.

Working...