Appeals Court
Rejects Trump Bid to Reinstate Travel Ban
By Michael A. Memoli, Jaweed Kaleem and Lisa Mascaro
February 05, 2017 "Information
Clearing House"
- "LA
Times" -
President Trump
grappled Saturday with the first major setback to his
young administration, appearing to question the
constitutional checks on his power after a judge’s order
reopened the flow of travelers from seven mostly Muslim
nations covered by his controversial travel ban.
The Department of Homeland
Security said Saturday that it had suspended “any and
all actions” related to Trump’s executive action after
federal Judge James Robart issued a temporary
restraining order, effective nationwide, in response to
a lawsuit filed by the states of Washington and
Minnesota. The suit argued that the president’s moves
had amounted to religious discrimination against Muslims
in violation of the U.S. Constitution.
On Saturday
night, the
Justice Department said it would appeal the order by
Robart, an appointee of President George W. Bush who is
now senior judge of the U.S. District for the Western
District of Washington.
Early Sunday,
the Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit denied the
request to immediately reinstate Trump’s travel ban,
asking both sides to file arguments by Monday.
The issue
may eventually end up at the Supreme Court. Several
other federal courts have also issued emergency stays
against portions of the executive order as dozens of
lawsuits proceed against it.
In response to Robart’s
restraining order, the State Department, which had
“provisionally revoked” 60,000 visas since the president
signed his Jan. 27 order, said Saturday that it had
started reaccepting those visas from people in the
countries affected.
Some travelers
in countries affected by the suspension already were
being allowed to board planes headed to the U.S., as
foreign airlines started telling passengers Saturday
that the immigration ban had been lifted. Many rushed to
catch flights, worried that the window to travel might
soon be closed again by courts.
At the airport
in Boston, crowds had gathered at international arrivals
to welcome those from the restricted countries. They
held signs saying, “Refugees are welcome in the U.S.A,”
“Christians build bridges, not walls” and “I am home and
so are you.”
“We had more
than 40 mostly Iranian nationals land and clear customs
today. We’ve had Tunisians and Syrians too, all flying
from Germany on Lufthansa,” said Kerry Doyle, an
attorney with the American Immigration Lawyers Assn. who
was posted at the airport.
Many visa
holders had changed their plans to fly to Massachusetts
even if it wasn’t their final destination because of an
earlier Boston federal judge’s temporary order against
Trump’s ban that was being applied locally when the
national order came down from Seattle.
“It’s a whole
different feeling at the airport than last week,” Doyle
said.
Trump’s
executive order, which also includes a temporary ban on
most refugee admissions and indefinitely for Syrians,
was one of several the president has signed since taking
office as part of a White House strategy designed to
begin implementing his governing vision with maximum
impact.
But the torrid
pace of action sparked an equally fierce public response
that continued Saturday, including protests in Los
Angeles and other cities. One march neared the gates of
the Palm Beach, Fla., estate being branded as the
“Winter White House” where Trump was spending the third
weekend of his presidency.
Trump and his
advisors had largely downplayed the confusion his order
sparked and insisted it was on solid legal ground, even
though on Monday he dismissed the acting attorney
general who had told Justice Department attorneys to
cease defending it in court.
Trump began
Saturday with a series of tweets against Robart in which
he blasted the “so-called judge” for a “ridiculous”
opinion.
“What is our
country coming to when a judge can halt a Homeland
Security travel ban and anyone, even with bad
intentions, can come into U.S.?” he asked later in
another Twitter message.
Activists and
state officials opposed to Trump’s order
celebrated. “The law is a powerful thing. It has the
ability to hold everyone accountable to it, and that
includes the president of the United States,” Washington
state Atty. Gen. Bob Ferguson said at a news conference
after the court decision.
Democrats
seized on Trump’s criticism of the judge as an opening
in the emerging Senate
confirmation battle over the president’s Supreme Court
nominee.
Senate Minority
Leader Charles E. Schumer of New York said Trump’s
attack “shows a disdain for an independent judiciary
that doesn't always bend to his wishes.”
With every
outburst, Schumer said, Trump just "raises the bar even
higher" for federal Judge Neil Gorsuch's nomination.
Democrats were
quick to remind that this was not the first time Trump
has singled out a judge, comparing it to his attacks
during the campaign on American-born Judge Gonzalo
Curiel of San Diego, who Trump said could not be
impartial because of his Mexican heritage.
“Now he is
attempting to bully and disparage yet another
federal judge — this one appointed by a Republican
president and confirmed by a Republican Senate — for
having the audacity to do his job and apply the rule
of the law,” said Sen.
Patrick Leahy of Vermont, a Democrat and former
chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. “The
president’s hostility toward the rule of law is not
just embarrassing, it is dangerous.”
Trump’s
Republican allies in Congress remained largely
silent over the court’s stay, and GOP
leaders declined to respond to the president’s
attacks on the judge.
Congressional leaders have been furious
after being cut out of the White House's planning
and execution of the travel ban, and they continued
Saturday scrambling to repair the chaotic rollout.
Many lawmakers have been fielding frantic requests
from constituents calling their offices and pleading
for help for family members, students and others
ensnared in the travel ban.
Some of the
confusion surrounding Trump’s early moves has been
attributed to a tight circle of decision-making in
the White House, centered around senior policy
advisor Stephen Miller and chief strategist Stephen
K. Bannon.
But James
Carafano, who oversaw national security planning
during Trump’s transition, described a more
deliberate approach that flowed from Trump’s own
view of a security threat.
“People are
kind of in shock and awe of the phenomenon so
they’re running around coming up for explanations
for it,” said Carafano, a national security and
foreign policy analyst for the Heritage Foundation,
a conservative think tank. “The notion that somehow
they could have waited and done more vetting and
talked to more people — and what? It would have been
less controversial? Give me a break.
“They
understood there was going to be some friction, but
those things could be worked through,” he said. “And as
a matter of fact, you’ve seen them working through this
pretty quickly.”
After civil
rights groups filed lawsuits on behalf of those who had
green cards designating them as permanent legal
residents, the Trump administration clarified that
green-card holders would be exempt from the travel ban.
Government officials also reversed a prior position this
week and said that dual citizens who held citizenship
from one nation that was not on the restricted list
would be exempt, even if they also were citizens of a
country on the list.
The views
expressed in this article are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of
Information Clearing House.
A heartbreaking story: Tears of joy as Syrian family is
reunited despite Trump travel ban
It is unacceptable to slander, smear or engage in personal attacks on authors of articles posted on ICH.
Those engaging in that behavior will be banned from the comment section.
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)