Trump Decree on Immigration Launches Political and Judicial Battle
Despite protests and legal action against President Donald Trump’s decree that barbed refugees and citizens from seven Muslim countries, the White House said Monday that the application of restrictions began well and showed no sign of retreat.
The president downplayed chaos at airports and the protests generated by his decree, incorrectly stating that delays and cancellations over the weekend were caused by a breakdown of the Delta airline.
Only 109 people of 325,000 were detained for check-in, “Trump wrote in his still hyperactive personal account on a social network.” There is nothing subtle about looking for terrorists before they can enter our country. “In the nationalist wave of the boss, Sean Spicer, A spokesman for the White House, said the nuisance caused by the decree is a lesser evil in the effort to secure the country. “We are the best country in the world. The Democratic opposition has promised to do whatever it can to overturn the decree in Congress, but it ‘s hard to say that it is a right, “he said,” to come to America is a privilege, not a right. ” Will succeed in doubling the Republican majority. The final clash should be in the Supreme Court.
Sixteen state attorneys general have declared war on the decree, signed last Friday by President Trump, which suspended the admission of refugees for 120 days and barred for 90 days the entry of citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries. Syrian refugees are blocked indefinitely. “We will use the instruments of our offices to fight against this unconstitutional order,” said the statement of the 16 prosecutors, all from states governed by Democrats.
After federal judges had suspended the decree on Saturday (28), the legal battle is expected to intensify and reach the Supreme Court, said Stephen Legomsky, an immigration expert at Washington University in St. Louis, who advised Last three presidents. According to him, the decree appears to have been drafted in a form to shield it from a constitutional remedy, omitting, for example, the word “Muslims.” But Trump’s promise in a campaign to veto Islam’s entry into the country could lead the court to violate two provisions of the constitution, which prohibits discrimination based on race and religion, and another that guarantees religious freedom.
TRUMP BAR IMMIGRANTS
It ‘s hard to predict the Supreme’s ruling, says Legomsky. Firstly because the supreme court is embezzled, with eight judges (out of nine), and President Trump is about to appoint his nominee, which will tip the balance to the side of the Conservatives. But the unique character of the issue makes the score unpredictable even among conservative judges, he says. “What makes it harder to predict the Supreme Court’s decision is that no president has ever done anything like it.The Court has never passed this test,” he says. “There have been cases of presidents who have vetoed certain individuals or groups, but none have prohibited immigration from a particular country.”
US Attorney General Sally Q. Yates has ordered the judiciary not to uphold Trump’s decree. In a letter to Justice Department lawyers, she says she is not convinced that the defense of the order is consistent with her responsibility to “seek justice and defend what is right.” The gesture shows the climate of insurgency in the new government, but it is little more than symbolic, since Yates, a remnant of the Obama administration, is soon to be replaced by Sen. Jeff Sessions, an immigration lineup that Trump appointed to the post and Awaits confirmation from the Senate. On Monday night, Trump criticized Yates and called her “Obama’s attorney general.”
The decree does not explicitly mention the target countries but refers to them quoting Obama’s order that hardened the issuance of visas to nations considered sources of terrorism: Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Libya, and Somalia. The Obama decree was signed in December 2015 shortly after Trump proposed barring Muslims, leading to speculation that it would have been an answer.