Posted on 05/08/2017 9:07:12 AM PDT by xzins
President Trump’s revised executive order, commonly referred to as the travel ban, will be reviewed by a federal appeals court on Monday afternoon.
The case, International Refugee Assistance v Trump, is centered on a battle between presidential authority and the rights of foreigners to travel to the United States. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Virginia will decide if the travel order violates the First or Fourteenth amendments to the Constitution or the anti-discrimination section of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
The Constitution does not usually apply to non-U.S. citizens on foreign soil. But a professor of immigration law at Fordham University Law School told Forbes that the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause does apply to the federal government. “I’m not arguing the Constitution gives each person a right to enter,” said Jennifer Gordon. But “when the U.S. government establishes a preferred religion, it violates the Constitution.”
The plaintiffs say that the president’s order is blatant religious discrimination since the six countries involved have mostly Muslim populations: Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.
Refugee groups will find using the Fourteenth amendments’ Equal Protection clause much tougher. The clause states that “No state shall…deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” As the refugees are not within any state’s jurisdiction it will be difficult to argue that the clause applies to them.
The anti-discrimination section of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) will apply. But it will face direct opposition from its own language. The law, passed in 1952, contains a provision in section 212(f) laying out presidential authority.
Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may, may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. INA was amended in 1965 to add the anti-discrimination provision that reads, “no person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person’s race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.”
The anti-discrimination provision was enacted later than the original INA so the doctrine of implied repeal may apply. When an Act of Congress conflicts with an earlier one, implied repeal dictates that the later prevails and the earlier is repealed. Implied repeal won’t come into play unless the court is unable or unwilling to reconcile the two provisions with a reasonable interpretation.
The travel order will also be decided on in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals at a later date.
Trump’s statements during the campaign were brought up any number of times in yesterday’s hearing. My take on the hearing is that I’ll consider it a miracle if Trump wins with all these democrats. I think they outnumbered the pubs about 9 to 4.
It really had little to do with Trump’s actual written order or the law. The order was rarely mentioned.
Allow me to simplify it even further for you:
Muslims do NOT believe in The Natural Rights of Man.
Which means they can't accept the United States Constitution.
It's literally that simple.
This means that if Captain Humayun Khan [famously used as a catspaw during the presidential election] was a devout Muslim, EVEN THOUGH he died in Iraq serving in the United States Army - he could not have sworn a valid oath to uphold the Constitution.
So, thanks for your service, Captain - but you didn't die for the country.
They're popping up like weeds.
WHO KNEW that we had so many black-robed mini-Presidents running the country?
“It really had little to do with Trump’s actual written order or the law. The order was rarely mentioned.”
This is ridiculous. If judges, people who went to law school, people who supposedly can handle logical thought, are going completely on emotion and politics. I think the country is toast. We were just given a temporary reprieve.
Even a geometry student can handle logical thinking. Well, maybe not with today’s schools…
That is a travesty. Any national impact order should have to be approved first by Scotus before implementation.
There are about 700 of these federal district Judges
I’m afraid they don’t even go so deep as emotion.
It appeared to me to be pure party politics. The dems were in lockstep with their party talking points.
As if orders had been delivered.
Either she signed legislation to screw us, or if it was blocked?:
"A federal judge today ruled..."
It has meaning. In the context of the 14th it excludes foreign diplomats and members of the Indian nations that reside in the US but have limited sovreignty.
In both cases, the surrendering of jurisdiction is based on treaties between the respective nations.
Immigrants aren't covered and are subject to our jurisdiction.
An ex would have to. A present wife just reminds you to do things over and over and over and over.
Do foreign countries recognize a right for Americans to travel to their country? Well, there you are. No reciprocity, no right.
But that is what liberals, and many moderates, don’t quite grasp, which I suppose is why they don’t see the problem here.
The Nazis had their own weird religion too so I guess they should not have been discriminated against as well.
The United States of America is not a Court Dictatorship in which the other branches of government merely get to make suggestions.
The Constitution grants the chief executive the power to enforce the laws of the land. In addition to being commander in chief, and executive of all cabinet officers and of their departments, the POTUS is fully empowered by US law to make all decisions regarding enforcement of immigration laws. Congress itself wrote those laws.
The current argument against the President’s temporary travel restriction is that the President spoke words that could be seen as unaccepting toward all muslims. Therefore, because his heart isn’t in the right place, he isn’t qualified to conduct his constitutional duties.
That’s good to know. I don’t like the IRS. That should disqualify me from sending them my money.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.