- By Zakiya Afzani
Trump’s second attempt at a #MuslimBan has been blocked by federal courts for a second time
The government filed a brief notice Friday saying that it would appeal the Maryland ruling to the US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit.
Following the news, the American Civil Liberties Union said it looks forward to defending the recent rulings blocking Trump’s illegal immigration order.
“President Trump’s Muslim ban has fared miserably in the courts, and for good reason, it violates fundamental provisions of our Constitution. We look forward to defending this careful and well-reasoned decision in the appeals court.” Omar Jadwat, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Immigrants’ Rights Projects, said in a statement.
The ruling in Maryland and another in Hawaii earlier this week were victories for civil liberties groups and advocates for immigrants and refugees. They argued that a ban on travel from six Muslim countries violated the First Amendment. The Trump administration argued the ban was intended to protect the United States.
Federal law gives the president broad authority over immigration, in the same constitutional set up Turkish President Erdogan is trying to implement should the Turkish referendum this year vote in his favour. Former US President, Jimmy Carter used it to deny Iranians entry to the US, Ronald Reagan to bar Cubans who didn’t already have relatives in the USA and President Barack Obama to keep out North Korean officials.
When federal courts blocked Trump’s revised travel ban from taking effect, the judges spelled out their major concern: the unusual record of statements by the president and his advisers suggesting the executive order’s real purpose was to discriminate against Muslims, in violation of the Constitution’s ban on officially favouring or disfavouring any religion.
Neither U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang in Maryland nor Judge Derrick Watson believed that the administration’s reasoning that the travel ban was about national security.
“The history of public statements continues to provide a convincing case that the purpose of the second executive order remains the realization of the long-envisioned Muslim ban.” Chuang wrote.
Watson criticized what he called the “illogic” of the government’s arguments and cited “significant and unrebutted evidence of religious animus” behind the travel ban. He also noted that while courts should not examine the “veiled psyche” and “secret motives” of government decision-makers, “the remarkable facts at issue here require no such impermissible inquiry.”
“For instance, there is nothing ‘veiled’ about this press release: ‘Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,'” he wrote, referring to a statement Trump issued as a candidate.
Trump has vowed to continue to fight back and seek to ban Muslims from the USA. This week Trump has unveiled that Muslims will not be allowed to use electronic devices on flights to the US. [Read more…]
This story is available on:
APPLE NEWS | GOOGLE NEWS | AL-SAHAWAT TIMES
Talk to a journalist: