White House considers rewriting Trump’s immigration order
The White House is considering rewriting the executive order barring refugees and citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the country, according to officials, indicating the administration may try to restore some aspects of the now-frozen travel ban or replace it with other face-saving measures.
The deliberations come after a panel with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit declined Thursday to immediately reinstate President Trump’s controversial directive. Officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal discussions, said the White House and Justice Department are also mulling whether to ask the full 9th Circuit or the Supreme Court to intervene. Government lawyers could alternatively wage a legal battle in the lower courts to address more squarely whether Trump’s directive violates the constitution.
Ironically just a moment ago I received several “Alerts” on this system that the White House is not going to ask the Supreme Court to intervene. The alerts came to me from The Washington Post, Fox News, The New York Times as well as The Christian Science Monitor and USA Today.
“The problem is this is such a bad case for the government to be making these arguments,” Fresco said. And of course, I personally disagree with him. In support of my opinion is the notion that I do believe that many people – regardless of their religion – need additional vetting. As far as I am concerned this is simply more of a national security issue than any of the other named provisions such as discrimination, religious freedom, or trying to encapsulate some myth of Nazi Germany or the persecution of Jews by the aforementioned Nazi Germany.
“We’ll be doing something very rapidly having to do with additional security for our country,” Trump said. “You’ll be seeing that sometime next week. In addition, we will continue to go through the court process and ultimately I have no doubt that we’ll win that particular case.”
For now, the ruling from the three-judge panel with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals keeps Trump’s travel ban on hold, meaning those once barred from entering the U.S. can continue to do so freely. The court ruled that the government had not provided evidence of a national security crisis sufficient to overcome the harms two states alleged the ban was causing for businesses, universities, and travelers in their states.
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is in San Francisco, California. For many of our readers – especially those who are under the age of thirty – so much of the animosity that exists between the federal government and San Francisco has such a sorted past with American law and ruthless activism within the Bay area. The protesting there in San Francisco has most of the time turned violent as in the Vietnam War while raging back to the first or second case involving the Supreme Court and the case of the U.S.A. v. Wong Kim Ark in 1889, which then spawned the end of the Chinese Exclusionary Act.