Wednesday, October 5, 2022

Latest Posts

Why Did Trump Ban Muslims

What The Travel Ban Ruling Means For Presidential Power

Donald Trump vows to ban Muslims entering US

Adam Liptak, the Supreme Court correspondent for The Times, analyzes the 5-to-4 ruling in favor of the Trump administrations limits on travel from several mostly Muslim countries.

By Adam Liptak and Michael D. Shear

WASHINGTON The Supreme Court upheld President Trumps ban on travel from several predominantly Muslim countries, delivering to the president on Tuesday a political victory and an endorsement of his power to control immigration at a time of political upheaval about the treatment of migrants at the Mexican border.

In a 5-to-4 vote, the courts conservatives said that the presidents power to secure the countrys borders, delegated by Congress over decades of immigration lawmaking, was not undermined by Mr. Trumps history of incendiary statements about the dangers he said Muslims pose to the United States.

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said that Mr. Trump had ample statutory authority to make national security judgments in the realm of immigration. And the chief justice rejected a constitutional challenge to Mr. Trumps third executive order on the matter, issued in September as a proclamation.

The courts liberals denounced the decision. In a passionate and searing dissent from the bench, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the decision was no better than Korematsu v. United States, the 1944 decision that endorsed the detention of Japanese-Americans during World War II.

Donald Trump Muslim Ban: Why Werent These Countries Included

DONALD Trumps controversial executive order targets seven countries and it ignores several more. The question is, why?

PM defends $263k job after republic call

DONALD Trumps executive order banning the citizens of seven countries from entering the United States is supposed to protect the nation from radical Islamic terrorists.

But conspicuously, the order does not apply to several other Muslim-majority countries that suffer from well documented problems with terrorism.

On Friday, Mr Trump signed the order temporarily suspending the entry of people from Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Iran, Somalia, Libya and Yemen into the US for at least 90 days.

Mr Trumps executive order also suspended the US refugee program for 120 days and ordered his administration to develop extreme vetting measures for migrants from the seven countries.

However, Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, the United Arab Emirates , Indonesia and Afghanistan were not included on the list, sparking speculation as to why. Was Mr Trump taking potential diplomatic fallout into account, or did he fail to include those nations because of his own business ties?

THE DOUBLE STANDARD

According to the American public policy institute Cato, Americans fear of foreign terrorists is over-inflated, as the chances of being killed in an attack committed by a foreigner are about one in 3.6 million per year.

In fact, in that period, no American has been killed on US soil by anyone from the nations named in his executive order.

Four Years After Trumps Muslim Ban Its Legacy Lives On

Four years ago this month, on June 26, 2018, the Supreme Court upheld Trump v. Hawaii. The court ruled, despite evidence to the contrary, that President Trumps travel ban was neutral and that it was a matter of national security.

For most, the election of Joe Biden and his repeal of the Muslim ban renders much of Trump v. Hawaii moot. But with four years of hindsight, the Supreme Courts refusal to acknowledge that the policy was animated by Trumps animus still lives with us. Trump v. Hawaii not only upheld the Muslim ban, but it set a dangerous precedent that may well impact Muslims U.S. citizens and non-citizens for years to come long after Donald Trump or Joe Biden are gone.

Trumps Proclamation No. 9645 was not written in a vacuum. Its purpose could not have been made clearer than by President Trump himself. He had promised a complete and total shutdown of Muslims from entering the country, proclaimed that Islam hates us advocated for closing mosques, wanted to create a Muslim database and even favorably compared his Muslim ban to Japanese internment in the 1940s. Yet Trumps government argued that those comments were unrelated to the ban, which, it insisted, was based on national security.

Christopher Richardson, an immigration lawyer, was a U.S. diplomat between 2011 and 2018 and served in Nigeria, Nicaragua, Pakistan and Spain.

Don’t Miss: Who Is Trump’s Financial Advisor

The Supreme Court Steps In

At the Trump administrations request, and without review, the Supreme Court on December 4, 2017 permitted temporary implementation of the third Muslim ban, the September 2017 Proclamation 9645, rather than wait for the outcomes of pending actions in federal appellate courts. This administration strategy is a now familiar pattern, said Justice Sonia Sotomayor in a recent dissent, which forces the Court to consider important statutory and constitutional questions that have not been ventilated fully in the lower courts, on abbreviated timetables and without oral argument, thereby eroding a fair and balanced decision making process.

Without review, the Supreme Court on December 4, 2017 permitted temporary implementation of the third Muslim ban, rather than wait for the outcomes of pending actions in federal appellate courts.

The Supreme Courts acquiescence to the will of the Trump administration has empowered it to continue to restrict immigration. In January 2020, the administration added new immigration bans for citizens of Myanmar, Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan and Nigeria, and made citizens of Sudan and Tanzania ineligible for US diversity visas, which are awarded by lottery to qualified persons from countries underrepresented among US immigrants. Notably, Rohingya Muslims are now caught up in the travel ban and will be unable to seek safety in the United States from genocide in Myanmar.

Supreme Court Upholds Trump Travel Ban On Some Muslim

Mapping President Trump

Supreme Court reaches decision on the Trump administration’s travel ban.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld President Trumps controversial travel ban affecting several mostly Muslim countries, offering a limited endorsement of the presidents executive authority on immigration in one of the hardest-fought battles of this term.

The 5-4 ruling marks the first major high court decision on a Trump administration policy. It upholds the selective travel restrictions, which critics called a discriminatory Muslim ban but the administration argued was needed for security reasons.

In a written statement, Trump called the ruling “a tremendous victory for the American People and the Constitution.” As critics continued to decry the policy as “xenophobic,” Trump described the court decision as “a moment of profound vindication following months of hysterical commentary from the media and Democratic politicians who refuse to do what it takes to secure our border and our country.”

At issue was whether the third and latest version of the administration’s policies affecting visitors from five majority Muslim nations known as travel ban 3.0 discriminates on the basis of nationality and religion, in the government’s issuance of immigrant visas.

Chief Justice John Roberts, who authored the conservative majority opinion, wrote that the order was squarely within the scope of presidential authority under federal law.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Also Check: What Tax Cuts Did Trump Make

Trumps Muslim Ban Harmed Health Of Muslim Americans Study Finds

When former President Donald J. Trump issued an executive order in 2017 banning foreign nationals from select Muslim-majority countries from traveling to the United States, the sweeping decree quickly rippled down to affect health outcomes for Muslim Americans, Yale researchers say.

A new study by the Yale School of Public Health and partner institutions found that a significant number of people in the Muslim community in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area skipped their primary care appointments after the ban, and there was also an increase in their visits to the emergency department.

The findings, , provides evidence that an abrupt change in federal immigration policy can directly affect health outcomes among people residing in the United States legally. The study is one of the first to measure the causal impact of how policy changes such as these may affect Muslim-American immigrant and refugee communities.

Before the ban, primary care visits and diagnoses of stress for individuals from Muslim-majority nations were on the rise, the researchers said. In the year following the ban, however, there were approximately 101 missed primary care appointments beyond what would have been expected among people from Muslim majority countries not named in the ban. There were also approximately 232 more emergency department visits by individuals from nations targeted by the ban than would have been predicted.

The Faulty Logic In Trumps Travel Ban

The presidents stated purpose was to keep terrorists out, but his plan has all kinds of problems.

Exactly one week after he was inaugurated, President Donald Trump signed an executive order barring nationals from seven Muslim-majority nationsIraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemenfrom entering the United States for at least 90 days. Mass protests, wall-to-wall news coverage, and a series of legal challenges quickly followed.

Immigration lawyers and journalists camped out in the international terminals of airports around the country, seeking passengers from the affected countries as they arrived in a nation that appeared to have decided overnight that they were unwelcome. Judges in New York, Massachusetts, and Hawaii, among other states, temporarily blocked key provisions of the order residents in these locales and elsewhere contested its constitutionality.

The Islamic State has territory in Iraq, Libya, and Syria al-Qaeda operates largely from Yemen and al-Shabaab is based in Somalia. But as my colleague Uri Friedman has reported, nationals of the seven countries that Trump banned killed exactly zero people in terrorist attacks on U.S. soil between 1975 and 2015. The people around the world most likely to be affected by extremist violence are Muslims in the Middle East and Africa, among them the very nationals Trump banned with his order.

Read Also: What Has Trump Done To The Epa

Donald Trump: Ban All Muslims Entering Us

Republican frontrunner wants total and complete shutdown of borders to Muslims after San Bernardino shooting in latest boundary-pushing proposal

Donald Trump, the leading contender to become the Republican partys nominee for US presidential candidate, has called for a total and complete shutdown of the countrys borders to Muslims in the wake of the San Bernardino terrorist attack.

Trump made his most extreme pledge yet in a race in which he has consistently pushed the boat out on issues of race and immigration in a statement released to the media through his presidential campaign team.

He said there was such hatred among Muslims around the world towards Americans that it was necessary to rebuff them en masse, until the problem was better understood.

Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in Jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life, the billionaire real estate developer said.

To justify his extreme call for a total rejection of all Muslims seeking to enter the US, Trump turned to what he claimed to be polling data that underlined what he said was the violent hatred of followers of the faith toward Americans. However, the statement cites the Center for Security Policy, an organisation branded extremist by anti-race-hatred campaigners at the Southern Poverty Law Center.

A New Gyration On Why The Travel Ban Is Unconstitutional And The Potential Expectations Of The Us Supreme Court On The Muslim Ban Case: Conclusion

Trump supporters react to his plan to ban Muslims

Judicial Restraint is often in the eye of the beholder and the labels liberal and conventional dont always fit nicely when it comes to determining cases and the context of Judicial Restraint, Justice Antonio Scalias brand of originalism/textualism had a philosophical impact on the American jurisprudence, most remarkably in his 2008 Heller decision, his most imperative decision and one in which he used his originalism or textualism perspective.8282 See generally SIEGEL, Jonathan R. Siegel. The Inexorable Radicalization of Textualism. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Philadelphia, v. 158, n. 1, p. 117-178, dec. 2009. Justice Scalia found in the Second Amendment not just a collective right but an individual right to bear arms, the Supreme Courts most vital statement on one of the most controversial matters of our times.8383 Idem

The U.S. is a beautiful place to live with so much promise. When American or westerns call themselves the Melting Pot, They must ask if they mean this sincerely or not. Do really, they welcome all faiths and races or only those that conform to their certain points of view? In other words, must one assimilate to be part of the melting pot or will they forget animus of the past? I hope so. The world is a much more beautiful place when there is a plethora of colors, shapes, ideas, beliefs, and points of views.

Read Also: What Channel Is President Trump On Tonight

The Travel Ban Represented A Sweeping Curb On Legal Immigration

The human cost of the travel ban has been devastating. Not only has the policy torn families apart, but it has also contributed to crises including doctor shortages in rural America and a dramatic drop in enrollment among foreign students from affected countries.

More than 41,000 people have been denied visas due to the ban. Citizens of any of the banned countries could qualify for a waiver that would grant them entry to the US if, for example, they needed urgent medical care or were trying to reunite with their immediate family in the US. But those waivers proved exceedingly difficult to obtain.

Data from the State Department suggests that fewer people have been applying for visas since the ban was enacted: In fiscal year 2019, immigration authorities granted about 39,000 visas to noncitizens from the original seven countries covered by the ban as compared to almost 338,000 just three years prior about an 88 percent drop. Iran and Venezuela saw the biggest declines.

There was also a significant decline in the number of visas granted to citizens from the six countries subject to the expanded ban in 2020 but its hard to say how much of that decrease can be attributed to separate travel restrictions implemented on account of the Covid-19 pandemic.

National security experts have argued that the suffering of those like Alghazzouli was largely in vain: The travel ban has not made America safer, despite the Trump administrations arguments to the contrary.

Deleted Provision Regarding Safe Zones In Syria

A leaked prior draft of the order would have ordered that “the Secretary of State, in conjunction with the Secretary of Defense, is directed within 90 days of the date of this order to produce a plan to provide safe areas in Syria and in the surrounding region in which Syrian nationals displaced from their homeland can await firm settlement, such as repatriation or potential third-country resettlement.” This provision was omitted from the final order.Rex Tillerson, Trump’s secretary of state, had not yet taken office at the time the executive order went into effect.

During and after his campaign Trump proposed establishing safe zones in Syria as an alternative to Syrian refugees’ immigration to the U.S. In the past “safe zones” have been interpreted as establishing, among other things, no-fly zones over Syria. During the Obama administration, Turkey encouraged the U.S. to establish safe zones the Obama administration was concerned about the potential for pulling the U.S. into a war with Russia.

In the first weeks of Trump’s presidency Turkey renewed its call for safe zones and proposed a new plan for them, the Trump administration has spoken with several other Sunni Arab States regarding safe zones, and Russia has asked for clarification regarding any Trump administration plan regarding safe zones. The UN High Commissioner on Refugees and Bashar Assad have dismissed safe zones as unworkable.

Read Also: What Is Current Approval Rating For Trump

Islam And The American Right

From the start of the War on Terror, President George W. Bush took many steps to assure Muslims in the U.S. and abroad that America was not at war with Islam. He visited a mosque shortly after September 11 and declared, The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. Thats not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace.4 His administration did not seek to reduce immigration from majority-Muslim countries. The idea that Middle Eastern countries were capable of Western-style liberal democracy later became a key justification of the invasion and occupation of Iraq. In his second inaugural address, President Bush argued that all people desire and deserve freedom, noting that the call of freedom comes to every mind and every soul.5

Although some conservative commentators discuss the war on terrorism as being part of a much older battle between the Islamic world and what was once called Christendom, others frame the struggle as a defense of Western liberalism. Such conservatives point to examples of repression of religious minorities, sexual minorities, and women in majority-Muslim countries as reasons why Islam is incompatible with Western values. In other words, intolerance of Islam is necessary to safeguard other forms of tolerance.8

Following a disastrous attempt to transition from the Internet into a real world, culminating in a deadly rally in Charlottesville, Virginia in 2017, the Alt-right largely collapsed.

In His Words: Donald Trump On The Muslim Ban Deportations

Philadelphia Daily News Calls Donald Trump " the New Furor"

During his two-day Scottish property tour, Donald Trump spurred headlines and questions surrounding his controversial temporary Muslim ban and plans to deport undocumented immigrants in the United States.

On Saturday, during gaggles held on four holes of his Aberdeen golf course, Trump told reporters it wouldnt bother him if a Scottish Muslim came into the United States under his proposed policy plan. The response poked a glaring hole in Trumps initial blanket ban of all Muslims entering the United States and prompted multiple and still unanswered — questions about what this meant for Trumps most controversial policy going into the general election.

Also Check: How Do You Send A Message To President Trump

Latest Posts

Popular Articles