ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily

 




The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
© 1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Immigration Law Blogs on ILW.COM

If immigration ban goes to Supreme Court, Trump is shoo-in to win. By Nolan Rappaport

Rate this Entry



© Getty

Two states challenged President Donald Trump’s executive order, Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States, in a U.S. District Court. The District Court preliminarily ruled in their favor and temporarily enjoined enforcement of the order.

The government appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and filed a motion for an emergency stay to reinstate the order while its appeal from the District Court’s decision proceeds.

The court denied the government’s motion because it was not convinced that the government is likely to prevail on the states’ due process claim when the case is adjudicated on its merits. The court reserved consideration, however, on the states’ religious discrimination claim until the merits of the appeal have been fully briefed.

I have found no merit in the States arguments in support of either of those claims.

Read more at --
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blo...-is-is-shoo-in

Published originally by The Hill

About the author.
Nolan Rappaport
was detailed to the House Judiciary Committee as an Executive Branch Immigration Law Expert for three years; he subsequently served as the immigration counsel for the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims for four years. Prior to working on the Judiciary Committee, he wrote decisions for the Board of Immigration Appeals for 20 years. He also has been a policy advisor for the DHS Office of Information Sharing and Collaboration under a contract with TKC Communications, and he has been in private practice as an immigration lawyer at Steptoe & Johnson.








Submit "If immigration ban goes to Supreme Court, Trump is shoo-in to win.  By Nolan Rappaport" to Facebook Submit "If immigration ban goes to Supreme Court, Trump is shoo-in to win.  By Nolan Rappaport" to Twitter Submit "If immigration ban goes to Supreme Court, Trump is shoo-in to win.  By Nolan Rappaport" to Google Submit "If immigration ban goes to Supreme Court, Trump is shoo-in to win.  By Nolan Rappaport" to StumbleUpon Submit "If immigration ban goes to Supreme Court, Trump is shoo-in to win.  By Nolan Rappaport" to Reddit Submit "If immigration ban goes to Supreme Court, Trump is shoo-in to win.  By Nolan Rappaport" to Digg Submit "If immigration ban goes to Supreme Court, Trump is shoo-in to win.  By Nolan Rappaport" to del.icio.us

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags

Comments

  1. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Update,February 18:

    For my updated Febryary 18 ilw.com comment about the resemblance between the leaked DHS plan to use the National Guard for immigration roundups and how the Nazis began rounding up their political opponents in 1933, right after Hitler took power, see:


    http://blogs.ilw.com/entry.php?9725-...onal-Guard-for


    My original comment follows:

    I do not know Arabic, but many years ago, I came across the following lines by the 10th century Iraqi poet Al-Mutanabbi, who is considered by citizens of Trump's banned countries such as Iraq, and throughout the Arab world, to be one of the greatest classical Arabic poets who ever lived.

    (For anyone reading this who does know Arabic, I apologize for any mistakes in the following transliteration):

    Wa taadumu fi 'ain assaghir assagharuha,

    Wa tasgharu fi 'ain al azim al azaimu.

    Here is a rough translation, as closely as I can remember:

    "Those who are small look on their small deeds as great,

    And those who are great look on their great deeds as small."

    If Al-Mutanabbi were alive today, over 1,000 years after he wrote those words, I have no doubt that he would say that the first line above decribes Donald Trump, who evidently regards his failed attempt to stop an Iranian baby who needed life-saving surgery from entering the US, as great, along with his equally unsuccessful attempt to ban an Iraqi translator who spent several years risking his life supporting American soldiers in his country and who was rewarded for his service to our country by being thrown into handcuffs upon his arrival in Donald Trump's America and threatened with removal before finally being allowed to enter the US.

    I am also sure that, if he were alive today, Al-Mutanabbi would be the first one to say that his above second line perfectly describes the three courageous judges of the 9th Circuit US Court of Appeals, two of them appointed by Democratic presidents and one appointed by a Republican one, who, without bravado, fanfare or even any tweets, and without paying any attention to the pathetic little insults coming from the small minded man in the Oval Office of the White House who called their decision "disgraceful" because it conflicted with his own "great" decree that almost 200 million people from seven countries which just happen to be about 99 percent Muslim, or close to it, are a danger to the US solely because of their religion.

    What could possibly be greater than the action of these three great judges in reminding our president that he is a constitutional leader in a democracy, who is subject to our laws like everyone else, and that he does not have a monarch's power to prohibit anyone and everyone he chooses from coming to America, only as an expression of his own little will?

    And yet, these great judges issued their momentous decision as if it were nothing special, just a small matter, all in a day's work.

    Even though Al-Mutanabbi lived 1,100 years ago in a vastly different country and society from America circa 2017, he appears to have understood something about America and our great democracy which some of our present day pundits and experts, not to mention our president, apparently have a few little things still to learn.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Updated 02-18-2017 at 09:43 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  2. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    We do not only have to rely on the words of classical Arabic poets such as Al-Mutanabbi to depict the full significance of Donald Trump's Muslim ban, as well as his deportation raids which are now striking fear and terror into immigrant communities across America.

    2,000 years ago, in the dark times of the Roman emperor Nero, a brilliant young Latin poet, Lucan, (Marcus Annaeus Lucanus) wrote the followong about the Roman civil wars in the time of Julius Caesar, who had lived 100 years earlier:

    Iusque datum sceleri canimus, populumque potentem

    In sua victrici conversum viscera dextra

    ("I sing of legality bestowed on infamy, and of a powerful nation

    Turning its victorious right hand against its own insides"}

    Is this not an apt description of what is happening in Donald Trump's America today, where our president's personal hatred of people from countries practicing a religion different from his own, and his racial animosity toward Latino and other non-white immigrants have been turned into his January 27 travel ban and his recent deportation raids and roundups?

    What purpose do these actions have except to cause the maximum amount of anxiety and suffering among hundreds, thousands, or even potentially millions of people who are either already living in the United States or have been granted permission (or would otherwise be eligible under our laws for permission) by our government to visit or live here, and of whom little or no evidence has been produced of any intention to harm the people of the United States?

    Indeed, in their cruelty, inhumanity, mendacity, and lack of any rational basis, Donald Trump's January 27 Muslim ban and his more recent deportation raids have little other purpose than to convey a message that people whose religion or skin color are looked down on by Donald Trump and his white nationalist supporters are not welcome in America.

    Iusque datum sceleri
    indeed.

    There is no other way to describe these actions than law bestowed on infamy, and the right hand of a great nation, the United States of America, turned against its own deepest values of freedom, democracy and equality of all people.

    (Lucan, by the way was ordered to take his own life by Nero when Lucan was only 25 years old. This does not mean that I am comparing Donald Trump with Nero. I am not. Nero was infinitely worse. The two are nowhere even close to being in the same league.)

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law

    Updated 02-14-2017 at 12:38 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  3. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    The Executive Order authorizes exceptions on a case-by-case basis. This should have covered the situations Roger described, but implementation depends on the officers in the field.

    Roger's attitude towards Trump reminds me of a joke about the news media that I heard a few weeks ago. Trump was on a fishing trip with the Pope and the Pope's hat blew off. The Pope wanted his hat back and told his aides to take a small boat out into the ocean to retriever the hat.

    Trump said, that isn't necessary and jumped into the ocean. Instead of sinking, though, he walked on the water to where the hat was and then walked back to the ship and returned it to the Pope.

    The next day, the news media announced, "The president does not know how to swim."

    Nolan Rappaport
  4. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    The president may know how to swim, or at least play golf at his own luxury resorts, but hundreds of mainly Muslim refugees from the Middle East and North Africa who are drowning every year trying to escape political persecution from the Syrian war criminal regime backed by Trump's ardent supporter Putin, religious persecution by the inhuman ISIS madmen whom Trump has spoken against eloquently but done nothing to oppose (so far as as been reported), and other intolerable conditions in their various countries do not.

    Yet, while Trump has now barred refugees, not only from Syria, who are arguably the most desperate and vulnerable of all, as well as from the rest of the world, from coming to the United States, in defiance of the spirit, if not the letter, of US and international law concerning refugees, and in contempt of the humanitarian ideals which are the essence of America, he continues to hand out favors and benefits to the privileged circle of billionaires, generals and nationalist white supremacists with whom he has surrounded himself.

    Is this what Donald Trump's America now stands for?

    Nolan's above reply to my comments actually contains two jokes, not just one. One joke is the one about recovering the Pope's hat, which I am sure that the Pope himself, one of the world's great defenders of refugee rights and human rights in general, would find absolutely hilarious.

    The other joke is that Trump actually gave immigration field officers any directions or guidance making exceptions to the ban on a case-by case basis as provided by his executive order. This only happened after the courts stepped in, which Nolan argues they had no right to do.

    Before that, according to media reports, lawyers trying to make contact with detained Muslim immigrants or visitors at the various US airports were told that the immigration (CBP) officers has no authority to give any information about the detainees.

    The lawyers were advised to "Call Mr. Trump" instead.

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/28/politi...to-travel-ban/

    Very funny, Nolan.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law


    Updated 02-17-2017 at 08:01 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  5. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    The president may know how to swim, or at least play golf at his own luxury resorts, but hundreds of mainly Muslim refugees from the Middle East and North Africa who are drowning every year trying to escape political persecution from the Syrian war criminal regime backed by Trump's ardent supporter Putin, religious persecution by the inhuman ISIS madmen whom Trump has spoken against eloquently but done nothing to oppose (so far as as been reported), and other intolerable conditions in their various countries do not.

    We have never taken more than a tiny percentage of the world's refugee population, which according to the UNHCR was 21.3 million in 2015, a number which surely has risen since then. You can blame Trump all you want, but the world's refugee crisis cannot be solved by increasing the number of refugees we are willing to accept in our refugee program.

    You can, however, improve our screening process to prevent our country from experiencing the terrorism that Europe has had since the flood of uncontrolled immigration into its borders.
    The refugee crisis is being blamed for the terrorist attacks in Europe (August 2, 2016),
    http://www.ilw.com/articles/2016,0802-Rappaport.pdf

    Yet, while Trump has now barred refugees, not only from Syria, who are arguably the most desperate and vulnerable of all, as well as from the rest of the world, from coming to the United States, in defiance of the spirit, if not the letter, of US and international law concerning refugees, and in contempt of the humanitarian ideals which are the essence of America, he continues to hand out favors and benefits to the privileged circle of billionaires, generals and nationalist white supremacists with whom he has surrounded himself.

    Syria yes, but the other countries are just subject to a 120-day suspension pending the adoption of a more effective screening system. Didn't Obama extend his screening process to two years?

    The other joke is that Trump actually gave immigration field officers any directions or guidance making exceptions to the ban on a case-by case basis as provided by his executive order. This only happened after the courts stepped in, which Noaln argues they had no right to do.

    That's not the president's responsibility. His administration is supposed to handle the implementation of executive orders, and in fact, the DHS secretary issued a statement that LPR status would be considered a dispositive factor in deciding whether a case by case basis exception will be made....unless DHS has adverse information about the returning LPR.

    Nolan Rappaport

    Updated 02-14-2017 at 03:47 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  6. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Of course the 120-day ban on refugees is going to be extended, in all probability for as long as Trump is in office (If the executive order containing the ban is every reinstated by the courts, which, as long as America continues to be governed by a Constitution, may be a lot less likely than Nolan seems to believe).

    Everybody in America knows that the 120-period is purely cosmetic, and not a serious expression of Trump's real intentions.

    Nolan is certainly far too knowledgeable, experienced and intelligent to believe seriously that Trump has any plans whatsoever to let even a single refugee from anywhere in the world into America as long as he is in the White House, unless he is compelled to by the courts.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Updated 02-14-2017 at 09:49 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  7. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by ImmigrationLawBlogs
    Of course the 120-day ban on refugees is going to be extended, in all probability for as long as Trump is in office (If the executive order containing the ban is every reinstated by the courts, which, as long as America continues to be governed by a Constitution, may be a lot less likely than Nolan seems to believe).

    Everybody in America knows that the 120-period is purely cosmetic, and not a serious expression of Trump's real intentions.

    Nolan is certainly far too knowledgeable, experienced and intelligent to believe seriously that Trump has any plans whatsoever to let even a single refugee from anywhere in the world into America as long as he is in the White House, unless he is compelled to by the courts.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    You don't read very carefully, either the Executive Order or my articles. See in particular --

    Trump’s Seven-country Travel Ban Is Just the Tip of the Iceberg (February 6, 2017), http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/5894ed61e4b061551b3dfe64?timestamp=1486400484184

    Nolan Rappaport
    Updated 02-14-2017 at 11:21 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
  8. ImmigrationLawBlogs's Avatar
    I agree with Nolan that Trump's travel ban, while initially directed against people from certain Muslim countries and against refugees, contains language which contemplates the possibility of effectively shutting down much larger parts of America's system for legal entry by foreign citizens from everywhere, not only from Muslim countries.

    As I have argued in several of my own Immigration Daily comments, the Muslim ban is very likely only the first step in a larger Trump/Bannon/Sessions anti-immigrant agenda, aimed at bringing America closer back to the "Nordics"-only 1924 immigration law which the new AG, Jeff Sessions, has praised in a recent (2015) immigration manifesto, and which Steven Bannon's Breitbart News also backed, at least by implication in one of its recent articles.

    The 1924 law which Sessions praised so highly and which Breitbart News expressed such nostalgia for (in an article by former Republican Congressman Tom Tancredo), also had at least one other strong supporter - Adolf Hitler, who wrote in Mein Kampf that the US was way ahead of the rest of the world in making race the foundation of its immigration policy.

    However, as I have also explained in more detail in a recent Immigration Daily comment, the fact that the Muslim ban (if upheld by the courts which I think is much less likely than Nolan seems to believe - since America is still America, not yet a country of one man rule iike Russia or North Korea), may and almost certainly would be extended to cut off almost all immigration from outside Europe (with nice big quotas for Russia, to be sure!) does not mean that the current ban is not aimed against Muslims.

    Among other things, the 1924 law banned Jews - but not based on religion - just based on cutting off immigration from the countries that had large Jewish populations.

    That is exactly the same strategy that Trump is now using against Muslims who are hoping to come to the US in his January 27 executive order.

    Ultimately, as long Trump remains in office (unless he is impeached of his Russia ties, for which the departed Michael Flynn is probably only the fall guy, or over his ethics violations or some other abuse of power - stay tuned) the watchwords for immigration in his administration will be: 1924 deja vu, all over again.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    Updated 02-17-2017 at 08:00 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: