|
Lucylastic -> RE: Judge says no to Travel Ban V2. (3/16/2017 3:18:33 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Evidently, this Hawaiian judge, in making his ruling, used President Trump's own words from the campaign trail against him, which does make the ban based in religion.
Not to mention this
quote:
The lawsuits also cited Rudolph W. Giuliani, the former New York City mayor who advises Mr. Trump. Mr. Giuliani said he had been asked to help craft a Muslim ban that would pass legal muster.
source
Trump said repeatedly during his campaign he would "ban Muslims from entering the United States."
He also said he would direct the Justice Department to put all Mosques and Muslim community centers under surveillance because "they know who the terrorists are that are in this country."
And while he has not attempted the second of his campaign promises focused on Muslims in the United States, his repeated demonizing of the faith has, at least in the eyes of some crossed the line to the executive branch either overtly or covertly attempting to circumvent the first amendment.
Do you not find it strange U.S. Hate Crimes Up 20 Percent in 2016, Fueled by Election Campaign?
A trend that has continued to rise since his election with the targets being both Muslim and Jewish in nature?
And, point of fact, none of the refugees admitted from any of the countries in question have been involved in domestic terrorism, and those Muslims that have been involved in domestic terrorist acts became radicalized after living in the United States for a number of years.
While I agree that visas issued to people from ALL Muslim countries requires some deeper scrutiny than those from other countries, and I would extend that to any Muslim from any country where terrorist acts have been committed outside those countries of predominately Muslim population (lets face it, the men involved in the 9/11 attacks were from Saudi Arabia, and on the watch lists of the time, and they were repeatedly allowed to enter the US to attend flight schools) an outright ban from Muslim countries is over kill.
Especially from a president who was elected on his Anti Muslim rhetoric and sound bites. His campaign statements did suggest that, in the specific religious belief of Islam, he was going to do anything to restrict the freedoms of those of Muslim faith.
Its not just trumps words, its Guilianis and Millers words as well
Watson wrote in his order. “The Government need not fear. The remarkable facts at issue here require no such impermissible inquiry. For instance, there is nothing ‘veiled’ about this press release: ‘Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.’”
Nor is there anything “secret” about the Executive’s motive specific to the issuance of the Executive Order: Rudolph Giuliani explained on television how the Executive Order came to be. He said: “When [Mr. Trump] first announced it, he said, ‘Muslim ban.’ He called me up. He said, ‘Put a commission together. Show me the right way to do it legally.’”
On February 21, 2017, commenting on the then-upcoming revision to the Executive Order, the President’s Senior Adviser, Stephen Miller, stated, “Fundamentally, [despite “technical” revisions meant to address the Ninth Circuit’s concerns in Washington,] you’re still going to have the same basic policy outcome [as the first].”
These plainly-worded statements, made in the months leading up to and contemporaneous with the signing of the Executive Order, and, in many cases, made by the Executive himself, betray the Executive Order’s stated secular purpose. Any reasonable, objective observer would conclude, as does the Court for purposes of the instant Motion for TRO, that the stated secular purpose of the Executive Order is, at the very least, “secondary to a religious objective” of temporarily suspending the entry of Muslims.
|
|
|
|
