Byron York: The challenge to Trump's order? It's a lot about money

washingtonexaminer ^ | 2/7/17 | BYRON YORK

[MarvinStinson]

Why is Washington State mounting such a vigorous challenge to President Trump's executive order temporarily suspending non-American entry from seven terrorism-plagued countries? Of course there are several lawsuits against the president, and there are lots of motives among the various litigants. But Washington State's is the suit that stopped the order, at least temporarily. And a look at the state's case suggests that, behind high-minded rhetoric about religious liberty and constitutional protections, there is a lot of money at stake.

Judging by the briefs filed by Washington State, as well as statements made by its representatives, some of the state's top priorities in challenging Trump are: 1) To ensure an uninterrupted supply of relatively low-wage H-1B foreign workers for Microsoft and other state businesses; 2) To ensure a continuing flow of high-tuition-paying foreign student visa holders; and 3) To preserve the flow of tax revenues that results from those and other sources.

To the first factor, Washington State argued that its residents have suffered from the Trump order, or might suffer in the future, because some of the state's biggest businesses rely on H-1B visas, which are often used to bring foreign workers to U.S. companies at lower wages than their American counterparts.

"The technology industry relies heavily on the H-1B visa program," the Washington State lawsuit said. "Microsoft, a corporation headquartered in Redmond, Washington, is the state's top employer of high-tech — or H-1B visa holders and employs nearly 5,000 people through the program. Other Washington-based companies, including Amazon, Expedia, and Starbucks, employ thousands of H-1B visa holders."

Subscribe today to get intelligence and analysis on defense and national security issues in your Inbox each weekday morning from veteran journalists Jamie McIntyre and Jacqueline Klimas.

"Many of those immigrant workers," the lawsuit added, "are from Muslim-majority countries."

That alone is a major financial issue at stake in the state's argument. Tech companies — many of whom filed amicus briefs supporting Washington State — "want an expansion of the H-1B work visa program because they want to hire cheap, immobile labor — i.e., foreign workers," wrote University of California Davis computer science professor Norm Matloff in the Huffington Post recently. Trump's order could threaten that, if only in a relatively small way.

In subsequent filings, Washington State's lawyers have emphasized the economic damage the state would sustain from any interruption in the flow of lower-wage H-1B visa holders. "Amazon, Expedia, and Microsoft depend on skilled immigrants, and the [Trump] order diminished their ability to recruit," a recent filing said. At a Feb. 3 news conference, Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson specifically thanked Amazon and Expedia for their help in the case.

On the second factor, the Washington State lawsuit points to deep concern about the effect the Trump order might have on foreign students at state universities. The order "caused immediate harm to Washington's public universities, which are state agencies," the state's most recent filing said.

International students, it turns out, are a major source of revenue for Washington State. "Only three other states — Massachusetts, New York and Delaware — plus the District of Columbia drew a higher percentage of its college population from overseas," the Seattle Times reported in November 2014. "Washington's universities and community colleges have welcomed international students, in part, as a boost to their budgets because they pay as much as three times the tuition that in-state students pay."

The number of international students at Washington State colleges and universities shot up 74 percent between 2010 and 2015, according to the Times. The paper also reported that the amount of money spent by those foreign students has doubled, to $825 million in 2015. Anything that might limit the flow of money, like Trump's national security action, could threaten that source of revenue.

That seems to be the opinion of Judge James Robart, of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington State, who stopped the Trump order nationwide. In a court session last week, after a Justice Department lawyer characterized possible Washington State financial losses as "speculative," Robart asked: "If I have a student who is admitted to [a state university], who is in a country who is now unable to come to the United States, enroll and pay tuition, is that not a direct financial harm?"

On the third issue, tax revenues, Washington State has not been able to come up with any specific number concerning the money it might lose under the Trump order. Its original lawsuit noted that, "In 2015, travelers from the Middle East spent approximately $96 million in Washington. This spending generated more than $6 million in state tax revenue and more than $2 million in local tax revenue." Of course, "Middle East" is not at all synonymous with the seven countries affected by the Trump order, so there's no telling what that actually means. But state officials suggest the loss, or at least prospective loss, is significant.

"We have claimed, very clearly, lost tax revenue," Washington State Solicitor General Noah Purcell told Judge Robart in the courtroom. Indeed, the state argued that it is lost money, both in taxes and in direct spending by visitors, that gives Washington standing to challenge the Trump executive order nationally. "There's no reason why the lost revenue of losing visitors who would come here and spend money should be insufficient to generate standing," Purcell said.

Much of the public discussion of the Washington State lawsuit has focused on constitutional rights and the debate over whether Trump's order is a "Muslim ban." Alleging that the president harbors some sort of animus against Islam, state attorneys have specifically questioned Trump's motives in enacting the order. But Washington State has motives of its own in pursuing the case. And one of those motives is measured in dollars.

[MarvinStinson]

bmp

[\/\/ayne]

To ensure an uninterrupted supply of relatively low-wage H-1B foreign workers for Microsoft and other state businesses.

Grrrrrrrr!

[manc]

Hang on. He is trying to tell me that there are more educated people from Somalia, Sudan, Yemen etc.
Sorry , but not buying it. I know our education system is not as good, but really!!!

[Castigar]

First of all, do ANY of the H-1B workers come from any of the subject countries? I seriously doubt it but if there are any I would wager that the number is very small.

Secondly, the H-1B visa program can be ended and in fact there is a movement to do that to force US companies to hire American workers.

Thirdly, none of this has ANYTHING to do with the “ban” itself nor do I see how any of it is a “defense” to it. The law is very clear on it’s face and allows the president to do just what he did if he determines it’s appropriate.

[Regulator]

and employs nearly 5,000 people through the program

Yeah. Redmond looks like Mumbai now.

Seriously? A State of the United States is arguing harm because...their companies can't screw American workers as hard as they have been?

[marktwain]

It is just a way to attack Trump.

[1L]

>>Robart asked: “If I have a student who is admitted to [a state university], who is in a country who is now unable to come to the United States, enroll and pay tuition, is that not a direct financial harm?”

This is such a profoundly STUPID question that can be answered very easily.

1. The UW system and other state schools limit their enrollment. If a foreign student can’t enroll, another domestic or foreign student CAN.

2. Universities are not revenue and certainly not profit centers for the state. Tuition does not cover the full costs of education — not the property, not the ridiculous salaries of administration, and not even the prof’s salary.

3. Universities dismiss students for their own reasons (academic and other) all the time. Even if the loss of a foreign student would be a “direct” harm, the schools think almost universally in non-financial terms for most issues. If it did, they’d have systems where paying more money got you better grades or something similar.

[Mr. Douglas]

1) To ensure an uninterrupted supply of relatively low-wage H-1B foreign workers for Microsoft and other state businesses;

---

Having worked in the Seattle area between 1983 and 2011, this is how I saw this from day one. It is literally about something that is the very reason American workers wanted Trump.

Anybody remember the Disney animators debacle?

This EO is a big deal to BOTH sides, but especially the other side.

[Jimmy The Snake]

I throw a BS flag on the Microsoft H1B Visa reason. I have worked in IT for 35 years and when the whole cheap (you get what you pay for but lower per person cost) H1B IT workers come fro India mostly, some from Pakistan, and some from China. None of the countries listed on the ban. So it is BS.

[Mr. Douglas]

Other Washington-based companies, including Amazon, Expedia, and Starbucks, employ thousands of H-1B visa holders.”

---

I’ve been to Amazon’s complex at south lake union. The number of cheap foreign workers who live, work and shop in that area is staggering.

[central_va]

When it comes down to it the American people are treated like doormats.

Kill the H-1B visa. Kill it!

[Mr. Douglas]

I agree with everything you said, but I think they see this as the camel’s nose in the tent. They are prepared to fight him for every inch, starting with this EO.

[LucyT]

Byron York: The challenge to Trump's order? It's a lot about money

Why is Washington State mounting such a vigorous challenge to President Trump's executive order temporarily suspending non-American entry from seven terrorism-plagued countries?

Of course there are several lawsuits against the president, and there are lots of motives among the various litigants. But Washington State's is the suit that stopped the order, at least temporarily.

And a look at the state's case suggests that, behind high-minded rhetoric about religious liberty and constitutional protections, there is a lot of money at stake.

Microsoft.

Thanks, Marvin Stinson.

[Grampa Dave]

The ancient Romans had a term for this under handed deceit from the rich and powerful.

Cui Bono ~ Who benefits from a crime

6 decades ago I was taking Latin II in high school.

I became very frustrated in spite of having an A in the course.

So, I asked my teacher what good was Latin, if I wasn’t going to be a doctor or lawyer?

She told me two Latin Words to remember, when things/issues were happening locally, county wise, state wise, nationwide and worldwide. Most people have no idea of what was happening, why and who was behind what was happening.

Those two words were cui bono!

cui bo·no?

Who stands, or stood, to gain (from a crime, issue/issues being pushed, might have been/be responsible for it)? Or who benefits?

Follow the money is part of the answer to any cui bono riddle.

So, who in America and the world benefits if we allow unvetted people and illegals to come and stay in America?

MS, Amazon, Starbucks, Expedia and the other 94 companies listed yesterday.

Conversely, who does not benefit?

Americans who are not elite and may be replaced by these Muslim excuse me employees from one of the 7 banned countries. Any of us who might be killed or maimed by one of these ROP so called refugees aka immigrants.

[ZULU]

Right. There is a HUUUUUUUUGE surplus of programmers and other hi tech students from Somalia, Libya, Iraq, Sudan, etc.

My guess is the few from these countries have rather, ah, specialized computer skills - like arming bombs.

[ZULU]

Right. There is a HUUUUUUUUGE surplus of programmers and other hi tech students from Somalia, Libya, Iraq, Sudan, etc.

My guess is the few from these countries have rather, ah, specialized computer skills - like arming bombs.

[polymuser]

So, we pit educators against H-1B abusers.
“Our student outcomes are great!” vs. “American’s can’t perform!”
Sweeeeeet :)

[manc]

exactly York is trying to rationalize this lawsuit, but it is what it is.
A way to slow down the Presidents agenda, and to attack him while having the media focus on this and not the good news coming out like jobs created.

[central_va]

Using one f-ed up visa program, the H-1B, to justify another f-ed up visa program. The evil is piling up on top of evil.