I need brief and short answer for each discussion, like a short paragraph not long. Don’t talk about yourself or personal stuff, talk in general and what you see. No sources, all the answers should be your own words and your opinion.
1- First discussion.
Circuit lets stand restraining order against Trump travel ban
The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has declined to reinstate President Donald Trumpâ€™s executive order banning travelers from seven majority-Muslim countries.
The decision (PDF) released Thursday afternoon says the three-judge panel is â€œmindful that our analysis of the hardships and public interest in this case involves particularly sensitive and weighty concerns on both sides.â€ However, the court said, the federal government has not demonstrated that itâ€™s likely to succeed when the full case is heard.
The ruling came in a closely watched emergency appeal of a lawsuit filed by the state of Washington over the order. The state, which was later joined by Minnesota, alleges that the order unconstitutionally hurt the state by depriving its businesses and universities of foreign-born workers, splitting up families and restricting residentsâ€™ travel. The states argued that the order violates several federal statutes as well as the First, Fifth and 10th Amendments, and that its national security concerns are a pretext for Trump to keep a campaign promise to ban all immigration by Muslims.
The order bans nationals of Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen from entering the United States for 90 days, even those with valid visas. It also bans refugee admissions under the U.S. Refugee Admission Program for 120 days, and Syrian refugees indefinitely. The order caused worldwide protests directly after it came down January 27, and more than 40 lawsuits or habeas corpus petitions.
The three-judge panelâ€”made of one Jimmy Carter appointee, one Barack Obama appointee and one George W. Bush appointeeâ€”rejected the Justice Departmentâ€™s argument that the states had no standing to sue. Via their state universities, the court said, states have standing because teaching and research is harmed when students and academics from the seven affected nations cannot travel, and potential students or professors from those countries cannot be considered. At least one visiting scholar had already been told he would not be issued a visa, the court notes. States may assert their own rights via the universities and may also have standing to assert the rights of students and faculty, the court says.
The 9th Circuit panel flatly rejected the argument that the president â€œhas unreviewable authority to suspend the admission of any class of aliens.â€ It noted that the government was not merely arguing for substantial deference on national security issuesâ€”â€œan uncontroversial principleâ€â€”but also that the presidentâ€™s decisions are unreviewable and to review them would violate separation of powers principles.
â€œThere is no precedent to support this claimed unreviewability, which runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy,â€ the panel wrote. â€œThe Supreme Court has repeatedly and explicitly rejected the notion that the political branches have unreviewable authority over immigration or are not subject to the Constitution when policymaking in that context.â€
Finally, the court considered the arguments for a stay of the district courtâ€™s ruling. It emphasized that its ruling was preliminary, but said the federal government was unlikely to succeed against the statesâ€™ claims about due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. The government argued that the affected people have no due process rights, but the court said the due process clause applies to all personsâ€”not just all citizensâ€”within the United States, as well as certain people seeking re-entry after leaving the country.
Furthermore, the court said, the district courtâ€™s order should not be limited to green card holdersâ€”lawful permanent residentsâ€”and previously admitted aliens, or in geographic scope to the states of Minnesota and Washington. Geographic limitations would violate legal requirements that immigration law be uniform, the court said, and the limitations on application would leave out affected people who have due process rights.
Finally, the court said the balance of interests between national security and the statesâ€™ interests weighed in favor of the states. It had harsh words for the federal government, saying:
â€œDespite the district courtâ€™s and our own repeated invitations to explain the urgent need for the executive order to be placed immediately into effect, the government submitted no evidence to rebut the statesâ€™ argument that the district courtâ€™s order merely returned the nation temporarily to the position it has occupied for many previous years. The government has pointed to no evidence that any alien from any of the countries named in the order has perpetrated a terrorist attack in the United States. Rather than present evidence to explain the need for the executive order, the government has taken the position that we must not review its decision at all. We disagree, as explained above.â€
The court also countered the governmentâ€™s argument that it had â€œsuffered an institutional injury by erosion of the separation of powers,â€ pointing out that the government is still free to pursue that argument in the course of the litigation. Injuries to the statesâ€™ residents, universities, students and employees, however, could be substantial and irreparable, the court said, and the DOJâ€™s argument that the discretionary waiver provisions were sufficient protection against such harm was unconvincing.
Minutes after the 9th Circuitâ€™s decision was announced, President Trump responded in a tweet: â€œSEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!â€
The president had tweeted of the lower court decision earlier in the week, â€œThe opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!â€ In response, ABA President Linda Klein told the ABA House of Delegates Monday that â€œthe independence of the judiciary is not up for negotiation.â€
2- Second discussion.
What are some trade secret types of ideas you enjoy?
For example the Microsoft Windows operating system is a closed system. Would computer technology had advanced quicker and farhter if Microsoft hadnâ€™t zealously protected itâ€™s computer code?
I like Kentucky Fried Chicken, do you think it is fair that Col. Snaders has protected the secret recipe many years after his death (the company owns the trade secret)?
What are some â€œtradeâ€™secretsâ€ that fascinate you? Products or services you like?
3- Third discussion.
Question 1: Do you believe most of the products sold in America are safe?
Question 2: People sometimes take products and use them inappropriately to make funny videos for Youtube. Do you think the manufacturer should be liable if someone is misusing a product to make a funny video? Why or why not?
4- Fourth discussion.
If I argued the US should relax Bankruptcy Laws and allow students to default on their student loans (with the understanding that the vast majority of loans are backed by the US government â€“ which means the federal government would pay off the banks that gave you your student loan), do you think it would help or hurt the economy?
5- Fifth discussion.
In the United States we praise people who have started their own companies, would you be willing to take out a loan to start a business yourself? Do you ever want to own your own business?
6- sixth discussion.
Generally speaking the most prevalent form of business is a sole proprietorship. You decide to start a business and just run the business using your personal checking account and credit cards. The problem with this is…if you get sued (someone starts a lawsuit against your business) and you lose. You can lose all your money, savings, possessions and even your house (if you own it). So the best way to start a business is to form a company and register it with the State of Minnesota (or whatever stat you live in). What do you think the best type of business entity is? Or, which would YOU use?
7- discussion number 7
One of the best ways to start a business is to buy a franchise (but franchises are expensive). What would be your ideal business to own?
8- discussion number 8
Do you think the products you buy are generally safe for their intended use?
Why or Why Not?
9- discussion number 9
Protecting the Environment
In the United States we have a lot of public land such as National Parks and Government lands. The State of Alaska has large amounts of untouched land that is still in reserve.
Do you think we should preserve the untouched land in Alaska for future generations?
Why or why not?
10- discussion number 10
Our global population keeps moving upwards and upwards. Real estate will become a much more scarce commodity in the future. Do you think you will ever buy and own a house or other real estate?
Why or why not?
11- discussion number 11
We have a lot of choices for products and services to buy and there a quite a few companies willing to sell us things in America. When I think of competition (and fair competition) I like to think of the advertisements aired during the commercials of the Super Bowl, the Olympics or any other big television event. The companies that advertise in these time periods are paying a LOT of money for the time period and for making the ad itself. We usually see ads from very profitable companies. In the real world the day to day search for customers leads some companies to make extravagant claims that are simply untrue (in which case there competitors usually turn them into the FCC for unfair trade practices) or some advertisements are just inadvertently funny.
Do you think most people should just â€œknowâ€ that some things are funny and not meant to be true in an advertisement —- or should companies always try to stick to the facts?
12- discussion number 12
After the United States went through the beginning of the Great Depression (starting with the stock market crash of 1929) the government passed laws that basically said if you are courting an investor you have to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Which means, if you are selling stock in a company to investors you have to tell the investors everything about the company (the good and the bad). In the early 2000â€™s we had a bunch of companies lie to the public about their income and expenses and the Sarbannes-Oxley law was passed. In some ways I sometimes thing that the Sarbannes-Oxley act forces companies that are publicly traded (on Wall Street) to prepare all their financial statements so they are easy enough for a high schooler (someone in about 10thgrade) to read and understand. This takes a ton of work to write an annual statement in such a way as to be totally understood by someone so young (and costs a lot of money).
How important is investing in the stock market to you?
Are there any companies you think will be great investments for the long term?
13- discussion number 13
Sometimes people in Minnesota are generalized as being â€œMinnesota Niceâ€ and other times Minnesota people have been called â€œPassive Aggressiveâ€ but when you think of law (and life in general) you have to stick up for yourself. Do you know what I mean?
I like this quote a LOT:
“The law helps those who help themselves, generally aids the vigilant, but rarely the sleeping, and never the acquiescent.”
– Chief Justice Prentis, Supreme Court of Virginia (1930)
What do you think the quote above means to you? By now, you should have realized that all my discussion questions have been (more or less) introspective and designed to get you to think about things.
14- discussion number 14
Does the United States have a Duty to — Police the World?
Does the United States have a Duty to — Provide money for foreign relief to other countries?