Trump team asks Justices to scuttle immigration cases




  • In World/Asia
  • 2017-08-12 20:07:00Z
  • By National Constitution Center

The Trump Administration, insisting that the presidential order limiting entry to the U.S. of foreign nationals from Mideast nations "is not a so-called 'Muslim ban,' " urged the Supreme Court on Thursday evening to throw out without a decision two major cases pursued by challengers to the restrictions.

The 84-page brief was the first document to be filed with the Justices on the major issue the Justices agreed in late June to review at their next term - the legality of President Trump's March 6 executive order suspending entry by foreign nationals and refugees. The Justices have scheduled a hearing on that issue on October 10. The challengers will file their own brief on the legality issue next month.

That review is separate from a continuing controversy about how, in the meantime, the Trump Administration can enforce the provisions of the executive order. The Supreme Court has twice issued temporary orders allowing enforcement of some of the order. That part of the controversy is now awaiting a decision in a federal appeals court in Seattle, and seems likely to return to the Justices in advance of the opening of their new term.

The government's new brief contended that no one among the challengers can show that they are now being harmed or will suffer any harm from the March order by Trump, so lower court decisions against the order should be set aside as lacking any legal basis. Two federal appeals courts have ruled that the executive order either was an unconstitutional form of religious discrimination against Muslims, or went beyond presidential authority under federal immigration laws governing the power to exclude foreign nationals from this country.

In trying to counter the claim that the real purpose of the Trump action was to keep Muslims out of the U.S. because of their faith, the brief argued that it is a serious affront to the presidency to second-guess the motives of a Chief Executive by accusing him of bias against "one of the world's major religions."

The federal appeals court's ruling against the executive order as a "Muslim ban," the new filing asserted, runs directly counter to President Trump's speech in Saudi Arabia in May calling for "tolerance and respect" for all faiths, and imputes a biased motive to a presidential order that is "neutral on its face" as to religion and is aimed only at protecting national security.

The appeals court's decision "plainly carries the potential to undermine the Executive's ability to conduct foreign relations for and protect the security of the Nation," the government lawyers wrote.

The brief also urged the Supreme Court not to allow lower courts, in weighing President Trump's immigration action, to rely upon statements he made while a candidate for the presidency. Those statements, including calling for a "complete Muslim ban," did not represent the views that President Trump held after he took the oath of office and assumed major constitutional responsibilities, the brief argued.

Restricting government authority based on political campaign rhetoric not only treats such speechmaking as the equivalent of actual policy, but also will present a threat to free speech for those making campaign orations, according to the brief.

The two main provisions of the Trump order that the Justices will be weighing as valid or invalid are a 90-day suspension of entry from all foreign nationals from six Mideast nations that have Muslim majority populations, and a 120-day suspension of entry from refugees from anywhere in the world.

These entry restrictions were suspended by the presidential order in order to give government officials time to improve the procedures for "vetting" foreigners seeking to travel to the U.S. As currently written, the 90-day suspension from the Mideast nations will expire in late September, before the Supreme Court even holds its hearing on October 10, and the 120-day suspension of refugees' arrival will expire on October 24, just two weeks after that hearing.

Those time factors suggest that the cases could lose their legal significance - in legal terms, become "moot" - before the Justices have the opportunity to rule on President Trump's order.

The new brief did not discuss the effect of those expirations on the cases. However, in discussing another timing factor that could affect whether the 90-day suspension has already become "moot," the new document said that any finding that the controversy has become moot should lead the Justices to simply erase the lower court rulings against the President.

On the validity of the Trump order, the brief made a full defense, both on the question of the president's power to issue the law under federal immigration laws, and on the question of whether it is an unconstitutional ban on entry based on religious bias.

The brief said clear-cut Supreme Court precedents demonstrate that the courts are ill-equipped to second-guess the Chief Executive in the use of power granted by Congress to decide which classes of foreign nationals can be barred from entering the country. The appeals courts were wrong in finding exceptions that allow them to do just that kind of second-guessing, the filing argued.

Legendary journalist Lyle Denniston has written for us as a contributor since June 2011 and has covered the Supreme Court since 1958. His work also appears on lyldenlawnews.com, where this story first appeared.

COMMENTS

More Related News

Trump
Trump's top economic adviser, Gary Cohn, is reportedly 'disgusted' and 'appalled' with Trump's Charlottesville response

Gary Cohn, President Donald Trump's top economic adviser and former Goldman Sachs COO, is...

Trump again blames
Trump again blames 'both sides' for Virginia violence
  • US
  • 2017-08-15 20:52:12Z

U.S. President Donald Trump insisted on Tuesday that not all of the facts were known yet about the aftermath of a white supremacist rally in Virginia that turned violent at the weekend and that both left- and right-wing groups used force. Trump, taking questions from reporters in the lobby of Trump Tower in New York, reverted to his initial comments on Saturday blaming "many sides" for the violence in Charlottesville, but on Monday had explicitly condemned neo-Nazi groups. "They came at each other with clubs ... it was a horrible thing to watch," Trump told reporters at what was supposed to be an announcement of his administration's infrastructure policy.

Trump says both left- and right-wing groups to blame in Virginia clashes
Trump says both left- and right-wing groups to blame in Virginia clashes
  • US
  • 2017-08-15 20:33:39Z

President Donald Trump on Tuesday said both sides were to blame in the clashes in Virginia over the weekend, adding that protesters on the political left violently attacked white nationalists rallying against a decision to remove a Confederate statue. Trump had been sharply criticized for his initial comments blaming "many sides" for the violence in Charlottesville, but on Monday had explicitly condemned right-wing racist elements.

North Korea leader holds off on Guam missile plan
North Korea leader holds off on Guam missile plan

North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un said Tuesday he would hold off on a planned missile strike near Guam, but warned the highly provocative move would go ahead in the event of further "reckless actions" by Washington. Some analysts suggested Kim's comments opened a possible path to de-escalating a growing crisis fuelled by bellicose words between US President Donald Trump and the North Korean leadership. The North's official KCNA news agency said Kim was briefed on the "plan for an enveloping fire at Guam" during an inspection on Monday of the Strategic Force command in charge of the nuclear-armed state's missile units.

Merck, Under Armour, Intel CEOs resign from Trump panel
Merck, Under Armour, Intel CEOs resign from Trump panel

The CEOs of athletic wear manufacturer Under Armour, computer chip maker Intel and pharmaceutical company Merck resigned Monday from the White House's American Manufacturing Council - with the Merck withdrawal ...

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

Cancel reply

Comments

Top News: Asia

facebook
Hit "Like"
Don't miss any important news
Thanks, you don't need to show me this anymore.