Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Federal Judge Halts Trump’s Executive Action on Immigration
Following a chaotic day of airport protests, taxi work stoppages, and general anger about President Trump’s executive order to temporarily ban immigrants from seven Muslim-majority countries, a federal judge in New York has issued an emergency stay. From The Hill:
Published in Domestic Policy, Immigration, LawThe court ruled on a habeas corpus petition filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on behalf of two Iraqi men who were detained at John F. Kennedy International Airport on Friday after Trump’s ban, The Verge reported Saturday night.
Since then both men, Hameed Khalid Darweesh and Sameer Abdulkhaleq Alshaw, have been granted entry to the U.S.
The ruling deals with a portion of Trump’s order handed down Friday, which bars Syrian refugees indefinitely and halts the resettlement of all refugees for four months as the administration reviews the vetting process.
Admission will resume only after vetting has been deemed “adequate” by the secretary of State, the secretary of Homeland Security and Director of National Intelligence.
Calling our legal gurus: How does a district judge have the authority to issue a national order? Are their powers not limited to the districts they work in?
[Redacted]
When do we declare the war on media won and proceed to the war on narcissistic, over-reaching judges?
Time to rein in the corrupt federal judiciary.
I look forward to the next Law talk.
Bull crap. This needs to be fought.
Now it begins….
The anti-American left has a lot of cards up their sleeves.
How do non-citizens (Iraqi foreigners) have standing to be represented in this action?
I’m going to go out on a limb and predict that this order backfires on the administration. The temporary ban is a pretty blunt instrument that is difficult to implement without what we appear to be seeing — non-citizens who have legal residence and extensive connections (families, friends, jobs) in the US being caught up in a Kafkaesque nightmare because they happened to be in transit when the order hit, or have a legitimate need to travel in the aftermath.
I am sure there are plenty of Trump supporters who will be unmoved by their stories, but at the political margin are a lot of people who will be disturbed by them. I am one of them.
I wonder… If a judge can be appointed by one President, can she be “in-appointed” by another President? I’m not sure how District judgeships work.
I am waiting 48 hours for hysterics to subside. Nearly everything breathlessly reported is probably bullcrap.
It was stupid to include current green card and H1b visa holders who might be travelling overseas.
My company has a couple of people in this category who were out of the country and it’s put the focus of this action on something pretty indefensible.
Of course, there’s the chance that the people caught in this situation might be cleared under the discretionary powers, but it’s focused all attention on people who in many cases quite remarkable (researchers at Harvard, MIT students, etc).
Well, now we have to define “in-transit” here. Yeah, if they were actually on a plane headed here, ok, I agree to their release, but only after they have been vetted. If they’re still in Syria, nope. The USA is not their only choice. They can certainly go to the EU with little to no trouble. And now Canada and Scotland have said they’ll take them in, so they don’t have to go back to whatever armpit they came from. The judge issued the stay because she believes “there will be substantial and irreparable injuries to refugees” – at this point, her belief is no longer true.
What about the guys working in laboratories here who are travelling back and forth to IRAN?
This is just bizarre. Countries abruptly close their borders in response to catastrophic attacks, like the US did post 9/11, or to stop individuals fleeing, like Khomeini did to trap Savak operatives within Iran in 1979.
So why now and why so suddenly? To achieve what?
The reactions of the ACLU, and various segments of the public and the courts were entirely predictable.
The Administration knew it wouldn’t actually stop that many people from eventually re-entering the US.
And, from the Australian news I just watched: Trump has confirmed that he will honour a refugee re-settlement deal Obama had struck with the Turnbull Govt – which covered people we have in detention, many from places like Iran. So I don’t think he even really cares about the issue of people from these countries coming ot the US or not.
The purpose was obviously: domestic political theatre.
But it’s acting as if the only politics that matter are domestic. Which may be unwise. Time will tell.
No. Federal judges at all levels are appointed for life and can be removed only through the impeachment process which, if I remember correctly, has happened less that a half-dozen times.
Yeah, I thought you were going to say that, because deep down inside I already know it. It would cause far more trouble if he could do it, anyway. Thanks.
There’s not enough information there to make any kind of intelligent decision.
As usual, Glenn sums it up best:
https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/255787
I think you’ve nailed it Zafar. This appears to be very poorly thought through. Theater for the faithful with little concern for the broader consequences or the harm done. I’ve been happier with Trump since election day than I would have expected, but this and the stupid wall are reminding me why I always thought him a poor fit for the job.
What is unsystematic about the way Trump has done it?
It could also be a move to strengthen his hand in the future. If he had taken a meager step, the outrage would have been the same, but now he has some room to back off, appearing to make reasonable compromises but still achieving what he wants long term – the vetting of “refugees” to make sure that they’re even refugees and that they don’t have radical tendencies.
At airports with protests. People being detained on the spot. American company employees cut off or rushing back. As if flying wasn’t a big enough pain in the butt already. Geez. I get that Trump was following through on a campaign promises and certain security measures should be taken. But this seems ham handed.
For the green card and H1B holders, arbitrarily catching anyone returning to the USA. It’s certainly reasonable to reevaluate these people, but it seems a bit random to suddenly do it for everyone traveling outside the country.
That’s Glenn Reynolds the Instapundit BTW!
Is it possible for an individual to use a green card, or other entry document, fraudulently?
Is it possible to create a fraudulent green card?
Is it possible to have a fraudulent ID that matches a genuine green card?
I’ll admit this is creates a very uncomfortable delay for people who thought they would travel without incident. People at the airport gates are unsure, so playing it safe.
But how is this any different than passport check at an airport, done most thoroughly when travel is from specific countries?
When the identity of the individual is vetted, to their entry documents, they are permitted entry to the USA with their documents.
The biggest bomb out of this story, that I see, is the alternative fact that the list of Countries of Concern dates back to 2015 & 2016, and that it was not generated by Trump in 2017, or in any way related to his business concerns.
What about the interpreters and other US Allies in Iraq, Syria and Kurdistan, now targets of ISIS, that are now unable to come to America after we promised them they could?
Just because a person holds a Green Card, does not mean they were vetted. We already know that vetting was done very poorly in many cases. Maybe “Glenn” can explain how exactly it causes “substantial and irreparable injury” to them to vet them twice, especially when they are from a country that has vowed to destroy America. like Iran?
There is a clause in the EO that permits exceptions, with vetting and personal interview. I don’t remember all the reasons that were listed in the EO though, but I would hope those folks would be covered.
Are you sure that they are being targeted?
Canada said they’d take them.
The process for getting a green card is one of the most invasive vetting processes you can imagine. Trust me.
I think I might emphasize that they are all vetted, but that some may have been more carefully vetted than others.
The part of the EO that says that Americans have been harmed by people with proper docs for entry seems a big point. There is a hole in the bucket…
also, isn’t there a kerfuffle about countries that don’t bother to support our request for vetting. I didn’t do a close reading of the EO, but it seemed to me there was a part of the vetting realignment that hinged on the sending nation to COOPERATE with the US vetting process.