~ “I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: as government expands, liberty contracts.” Ronald Reagan.
The Supreme Court of the United States just hours ago dismissed Hawaii’s challenge to President Trump’s extreme vetting executive order remanding the case back to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for dismissal as the case is now moot due to the expiration of the 120-day pause which ends today.
…The justices acted on the same day that the 120 period expired.
“Because those provisions of the Order have ‘expired by [their] own terms,’ the appeal no longer presents a ‘live case or controversy,’” the justices said.
The order comes as the Trump administration is expected to announce an updated policy on refugee vetting and admissions later Tuesday. President Trump has already slashed the overall refugee target from 110,000 people in 2017 to 45,000 in 2018.
But as the administration works improve its vetting procedures for visitors and would be immigrants to the U.S., it continues to be embroiled in court battles over the legality of its plan to curtail admissions to the U.S. from countries where there are concerns about terrorism and vetting procedures to confirm the identities of travelers[…]
Last month, POTUS issued a third travel ban that included Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela and Yemen. The usual judicial activists in Hawaii and Maryland have blocked the ban from going into effect with the exception of North Korea and Venezuela.
You can view the Supreme Court’s order below or here in pdf format.
March 6, 2017 11:30 a.m. EST
Office of Public Affairs
Contact: 202-282-8010
Q1. Who is subject to the suspension of entry under the Executive Order?
Per the Executive Order, foreign nationals from Sudan, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen, who are outside the United States and who did not have a valid visa at 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on January 27, 2017, and do not have a valid visa on the effective date of this order are not eligible to enter the United States while the temporary suspension remains in effect. Thus any individual who had a valid visa either on January 27, 2017 (prior to 5:00 PM) or holds a valid visa on the effective date of the Executive Order is not barred from seeking entry.
Q2. Will “in-transit” travelers within the scope of the Executive Order be denied entry into the United States and returned to their country of origin?
Those individuals who are traveling on valid visas and arrive at a U.S. port of entry will still be permitted to seek entry into the United States. All foreign nationals traveling with a visa must continue to satisfy all requirements for entry, including demonstrating that they are admissible. Additional information on applying for admission to the United States is available on CBP.gov.
Q3. I am a national from one of the six affected countries currently overseas and in possession of a valid visa, but I have no prior travel to the United States. Can I travel to the United States?
Per the Executive Order, foreign nationals from Sudan, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen who have valid visas will not be affected by this Executive Order. No visas will be revoked solely based on this Executive Order.
Q4. I am presently in the United States in possession of a valid single entry visa but I am a national of one of the six impacted countries. Can I travel abroad and return to the United States?
Regardless of the Executive Order, your visa is not valid for multiple entries into the Unites States. While the Executive Order does not apply to those within the United States and your travel abroad is not limited, a valid visa or other document permitting you to travel to and seek admission to the United States is still required for any subsequent entry to the United States.
Q5. I am presently in the United States in possession of a valid multiple entry visa but am a national of one of the six affected countries, can I travel abroad and return to the United States?
Yes. Individuals within the United States with valid multiple entry visas on the effective date of the order are eligible for travel to and from the United States, provided the visa remains valid and the traveler is otherwise admissible. All foreign nationals traveling with a visa must satisfy all admissibility requirements for entry. Additional information on applying for admission to the United States is available on CBP.gov.
Q6. I am from one of the six countries, currently in the United States in possession of a valid visa and have planned overseas travel. My visa will expire while I am overseas, can I return to the United States?
Travelers must have a valid visa to travel to the United States, regardless of the Executive Order. Travelers who do not have a valid visa due to its expiration while abroad must obtain a new valid visa prior to returning to the United States.
Q7. Will the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of State (DOS) be revoking the visas of persons ineligible to travel under the revised Executive Order?
Visas will not be revoked solely as a result of the Executive Order. The Department of State has broad authority under Section 221(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to revoke visas.
Q8. What is the process for overseas travelers affected by the Executive Order to request a waiver?
Waivers for overseas travelers without a valid U.S. visa will be adjudicated by the Department of State in conjunction with a visa application.
Q9. How are returning refugees and asylees affected by the Executive Order?
Returning refugees and asylees, i.e., individuals who have already been granted asylum or refugee status in the United States, are explicitly excepted from this Executive Order. As such, they may continue to travel consistent with existing requirements.
Q10. Are first-time arrival refugees with valid /travel documents allowed to travel to the United States?
Yes, but only refugees, regardless of nationality, whose travel was already formally scheduled by the Department of State, are permitted to travel to the United States and seek admission. The Department of State will have additional information.
Q11. Will unaccompanied minors within the scope of the Executive Order be denied boarding and or denied entry into the United States?
The Executive Order applies to those who do not have valid visas. Any individuals, including children, who seek entry to the United States must have a valid visa (or other approved travel document) before travel to the United States. The Secretary of State may issue a waiver on a case-by-case basis when in the national interest of the United States. With such a waiver, a visa may be issued.
Q12. Is DHS complying with all court orders?
DHS is complying, and will continue to comply, with all court orders in effect.
Q13. When will the Executive Order be implemented?
The Executive Order is effective at 12:01 A.M., Eastern Standard Time, on March 16, 2017.
Q14. Will the Executive Order impact Trusted Traveler Program membership?
No. Currently, CBP does not have reciprocal agreements for a Trusted Traveler Program with any of the countries designated in the Executive Order.
Q15. When will CBP issue guidance to both the field and airlines regarding the Executive Order?
CBP will issue guidance and contact stakeholders to ensure timely implementation consistent with the terms of the Executive Order.
Q16. Will first-time arrivals with valid immigrant visas be allowed to travel to the U.S.?
Yes. Individuals holding valid visas on the effective date of the Executive Order or on January 27, 2017 prior to 5:00 PM do not fall within the scope of the Order.
Q17. Does this affect travelers at all ports of entry?
Yes, this Executive Order applies to travelers who are applying for entry into the United States at any port of entry—air, land, or sea—and includes preclearance locations.
Q18. What does granting a waiver to the Executive Order mean? How are waivers applied to individual cases?
Per the Executive Order, the Departments of Homeland Security and State can review individual cases and grant waivers on a case-by-case basis if a foreign national demonstrates that his or her entry into the United States is in the national interest, will not pose a threat to national security, and that denying entry during the suspension period will cause undue hardship.
Q19. Does “from one of the six countries” mean citizen, national, or born in?
The Executive Order applies to both nationals and citizens of the six countries.
Q20. How does the lawsuit/stay affect DHS operations in implementing this Executive Order?
Questions regarding the application of specific federal court orders should be directed to the Department of Justice.
Q21. Will nationals of the six countries with valid green cards (lawful permanent residents of the United States) be allowed to return to the United States?
Per the Executive Order, the suspension of entry does not apply to lawful permanent residents of the United States.
Q22. Can a dual national who holds nationality with one of the six designated countries traveling with a passport from an unrestricted country travel to the United States?
The Executive Order exempts from its scope any dual national of one of the six countries when the individual is traveling on a passport issued by a different non-designated country.
Q23. Can a dual national who holds nationality with one of the six designated countries and is currently overseas, apply for an immigrant or nonimmigrant visa to the United States?
Please contact the Department of State for information about how the Executive Order applies to visa applicants.
Q24. Are international students, exchange visitors, and their dependents from the six countries (such as F, M, or J visa holders) included in the Executive Order? What kind of guidance is being given to foreign students from these countries legally in the United States?
The Executive Order does not apply to individuals who are within the United States on the effective date of the Order or to those individuals who hold a valid visa. Visas which were provisionally revoked solely as a result of the enforcement of Executive Order 13769 are valid for purposes of administering this Executive Order. Individuals holding valid F, M, or J visas may continue to travel to the United States on those visas if they are otherwise valid.
Please contact the State Department for information about how the Executive Order applies to visa applicants.
Q25. What happens to international students, exchange visitors or their dependents from the six countries, such as F, M or J visa holders if their visa expires while the Executive Order is in place and they have to depart the country?
The Executive Order does not affect F, M, or J visa holders if they currently have a valid visa on the effective date or held a valid visa on January 27, 2017 prior to the issuance of the Executive Order. With that said, travelers must have a valid visa to travel to the United States, regardless of the Executive Order. Travelers whose visa expires after the effective date of the Executive Order must obtain a new, valid visa to return to the United States.
Q26. Can U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) continue refugee interviews?
The Departments of Homeland Security and State will conduct interviews as appropriate and consistent with the Executive Order. However, the Executive Order suspends decisions on applications for refugee status, unless the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of State jointly determine, on a case-by-case basis, that the entry of an individual as a refugee is in the national interest and would not pose a threat to the security or welfare of the United States.
Q27. Can the exception for refugee admission be used for Refugee/Asylee Relative Petitions (Form I-730) cases where a family member is requesting a beneficiary follow to join?
No. Individuals who already have valid visas or travel documents that permit them to travel to the United States are exempt from the Executive Order. To the extent that an individual does not yet have such documents, please contact the Department of State.
Q28. Does the Executive Order apply to those currently being adjudicated for naturalization or adjustment of status?
USCIS will continue to adjudicate Applications for Naturalization (Form N-400) and Applications to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (Form I-485) and grant citizenship consistent with existing practices.
Q29. Will landed immigrants of Canada affected by the Executive Order be eligible for entry to the United States?
Landed immigrants of Canada who hold passports from one of the six countries are eligible to apply for a visa, and coordinate a waiver, at a location within Canada.
Q30. Has CBP issued clear guidance to CBP officers at ports of entry regarding the Executive Order?
CBP has and will continue to issue any needed guidance to the field with respect to this Executive Order.
Q31. What coordination is being done between CBP and the carriers?
CBP has been and will remain in continuous communication with the airlines through CBP regional carrier liaisons. In addition, CBP will hold executive level calls with airlines in order to provide guidance, answer questions, and address concerns.
Q32. What additional screening will nationals of restricted countries (as well as any visa applications) undergo as a result of the Executive Order?
In making admission and visa eligibility determinations, DHS and DOS will continue to apply all appropriate security vetting procedures.
Q33. Why is a temporary suspension warranted?
The Executive Order signed on March 6, 2017, allows for the proper review and establishment of standards to prevent terrorist or criminal infiltration by foreign nationals. The Executive Order protects the United States from countries compromised by terrorism and ensures a more rigorous vetting process. Protecting the American people is the highest priority of our Government and this Department.
Congress and the Obama Administration designated these six countries as countries of concern due to the national security risks associated with their instability and the prevalence of terrorist fighters in their territories.The conditions in the six designated countries present a recognized threat, warranting additional scrutiny of their nationals seeking to travel to and enter the United States. In order to ensure that the U.S. Government can conduct a thorough and comprehensive analysis of the national security risks, the Executive Order imposes a 90-day suspension on entry to the United States of nationals of those countries.
Based on commitments from the Government of Iraq, the suspension of entry in this Executive Order will not apply to nationals of Iraq. Iraq has taken steps to increase their cooperation with the United States in the vetting of Iraqi nationals and as such it was determined that a temporary suspension is not warranted.
DHS will faithfully execute the immigration laws and the President’s Executive Order, and will treat all of those we encounter humanely and with professionalism.
Q34. Why is a suspension of the refugee program warranted?
Some of those who have entered the United States as refugees have also proved to be threats to our national security. For example, in October 2014, an individual admitted to the United States as a refugee from Somalia, and who later became a naturalized U.S. citizen was sentenced to 30 years in prison for attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction in connection with a plot to set off a bomb at a Christmas tree-lighting ceremony in Portland, Oregon. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has reported that approximately 300 persons who entered the United States as refugees are currently the subjects of counterterrorism investigations.
Q35. How were the six countries designated in the Executive Order selected?
The six countries, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen, had already been identified as presenting concerns about terrorism and travel to the United States.Specifically, the suspension applies to countries referred to in, or designated under—except Iraq—section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. § 1187(a)(12).In that provision Congress restricted use of the Visa Waiver Program by dual nationals of, and aliens recently present in, (A) Syria and Iraq, (B) any country designated by the Secretary of State as a state sponsor of terrorism (currently Iran, Syria, and Sudan), and (C) any other country designated as a country of concern by the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence.In 2016, the former Secretary of Homeland Security designated Libya, Somalia, and Yemen as additional countries of concern regarding aliens recently present in those countries.
For the purposes of this Executive Order, although Iraq has been previously identified, based on commitments from the Government of Iraq, the suspension of entry in this Executive Order will not apply to nationals of Iraq. However, those who are dual nationals of Iraq and aliens recently present in Iraq continue to have restricted use of the Visa Waiver Program.
On the basis of negotiations that have taken place between the Government of Iraq and the U.S. Department of State in the last month, Iraq will increase cooperation with the U.S. Government on the vetting of its citizens applying for a visa to travel to the United States.As such it was determined that a temporary suspension with respect to nationals of Iraq is not warranted at this time.
Q36. Why was Iraq treated differently in this Executive Order?
The close cooperative relationship between the United States and the democratically-elected Iraqi government, the strong U.S. diplomatic presence in Iraq, the significant presence of U.S. forces in Iraq, and Iraq’s commitment to combat ISIS justify different treatment.In particular, those Iraqi government forces that have fought to regain more than half of the territory previously dominated by ISIS have earned special status.In addition, since Executive Order 13769 was issued, the Iraqi government has expressly undertaken steps to provide additional information about its citizens for purposes of our immigration decisions.Accordingly, it is no longer necessary to include Iraq in the temporary suspension applicable to the other six countries, but visa applications and applications for admission to the United States by Iraqi nationals will be subjected to additional scrutiny to determine if they have connections with ISIS or other terrorist organizations.
Q37. Are Iraqi nationals subject to the Executive Order? Will they require a waiver to travel to the United States?
This Executive Order does not presently suspend the entry of nationals of Iraq. However, all travelers must have a valid travel document in order to travel to the United States. Admissibility will be determined by a CBP officer upon arrival at a Port of Entry. Please contact the Department of State for information related to visa eligibility and application.
For those in the refugee resettlement industry, theirs is a sense of entitlement.
Social justice evangelicals and church leaders across the United wrote a letter to President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence asking that the executive order implementing extreme vetting of individuals traveling from jihadist breeding nations and the 90-day moratorium on Syria be rescinded.
More than 500 evangelical leaders from all 50 states signed a letter to President Trump asking him to reconsider his controversial executive order. The letter included the likes of Ann Voskamp, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary President Daniel Akin, and Open Doors USA President and CEO David Curry.
While they acknowledged the order could prevent bloodshed on American soil, America should still be a nation of compassion….
The letter points out that thousands of churches have welcomed and sheltered suffering refugees through the Refugee Resettlement Program[…]
For obvious reasons, the social justice warrior in the Vatican who has labeled the rejection of refugees “an act of war” overlooks those organizations under the umbrella of Christianity receiving hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars from the refugee resettlement program beginning with his own U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Many of the organizations who partake in the refugee resettlement programs are Christian in name only and for the love of financial gain have no problem quoting parables from the Bible and demanding compassion for refugees whose sole agenda is to convert infidels and/or chop off the hands that feed it.
As Christian pastors and leaders, we are deeply concerned by the recently announced moratorium on refugee resettlement. Our care for the oppressed and suffering is rooted in the call of Jesus to “love our neighbor as we love ourselves.” In the story of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37), Jesus makes it clear that our “neighbor” includes the stranger and anyone fleeing persecution and violence, regardless of their faith or country.
As Christians, we have a historic call expressed over two thousand years, to serve the suffering. We cannot abandon this call now. We live in a dangerous world and affirm the crucial role of government in protecting us from harm and in setting the terms on refugee admissions. However, compassion and security can coexist, as they have for decades. For the persecuted and suffering, every day matters; every delay is a crushing blow to hope….
World Relief (full name: World Relief Corp. of National Association of Evangelicals) is a social justice organization corporation whose survival and existence is SOLELY dependent upona steady revenue stream of taxpayer dollars.
Notice the lack of fundraising in the graph above? Namely, that tiny slither of orange in the second graph under “Expenditures Breakdown 2015.” Theirs is a sense of entitlement.
In addition to World Relief Corporation and US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) mentioned above, below are the major refugee resettlement businesses who receives tens (if not hundreds) of millions of taxpayer dollars for their doing their part in the Hijra with the blessings of Elizabeth Warren, Barack Obama and Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan.
Again, notice the lack of fundraising in the graph above? Namely, that tiny slither of orange in the second graph under “Expenditures Breakdown 2015.” Simply put, theirs is a sense of entitlement
Domestic and Foreign Missionary Service of the Episcopal Church of the USA, Ethiopian Community Development Center (ECDC) [ Episcopal Migration Ministries] [where are the financials?]
What all of the above businesses have in common is that while collecting exorbitant sums of taxpayer dollars, they do very little fundraising. After all, who needs to fund raise when one’s business is on the government welfare without threat of Congressional oversight and demand for accountability?
Those opposing Donald Trump’s executive order under the guise that it is a Muslim ban and “because that’s not who we are” selectively omit that more than half of the refugees being brought in are Muslim.
Theirs is a sense of entitlement as with all corporate elitists and the individual who has become addicted to the government dole, social justice refugee businesses (not charities, nothing charitable about them) fear a decrease in revenue under the Trump administration and are now holding fundraisers. How dare the president put them in such a position (sarcasm).
In December 2015, a George Soros financed group, the Evangelical Immigration Table (EIT) held a conference call with journalists (organized by Jenny Yang, vice president of advocacy and policy for World Relief). During the call, EIT released a letter addressed to Congress seeking an increase in the number of refugees from Syria and other nations (dog whistle for “more money”).
In addition, the letter called for Congress to nudge state and local governments into cooperating with refugee resettlement industry. Dog whistle for “do our bidding,” “refugees first” and “more money.”
Work with governors and local communities to welcome refugees. The U.S. refugee resettlement program is a federal responsibility that depends on the cooperation of local and state governments, as well as churches and volunteers. We urge you to work with state and local elected officials to ensure that states continue to fulfill their responsibilities...Our faith inspires us to respond with compassion and hospitality to those fleeing violence and persecution….Compassion is not in conflict with national security.”
“Compassion is not in conflict with national security…” certainly depend on whom one asks.
In response, Mark Tooley, president of the Institute on Religion and Democracy who today opposes the president’s executive order’s response stated:
“The statement also ignores the issue of entrance to USA of persons who may not be directly violent but who support theocratic and jihadist ideology, which obviously is at odds with democratic principles. Immigration and refugee resettlement for our nation is about more than Christian hospitality.”
In the same Breitbart article, Kelly Monroe Kullberg, founder of Evangelicals for Biblical Immigration like many non-social justice Christian organizations are “shocked that Christian charities are accepting so much money from the federal government to bring Muslims refugees into the United States. Imagine the wickedness of using Christians to permanently de-Christianize America. Imagine the suffering that will follow with Sharia law or more advanced Progressive ideology.”
These Soros financed refugee resettlement businesses such as World Relief and their social justice colleagues speak of compassion when in fact, the only compassion that they seek is the bottom line of their check books fed by a never-ending assembly line of refugees irrespective of their ill intent toward Westerners.
The office of Rep. Brian Babin (TX-36) last week released the following statement supporting President Trump’s executive order.
Excerpt:
Washington, DC – U.S. Rep. Brian Babin (TX-36), who has been a leading critic of America’s United Nations (UN)-led refugee resettlement program, issued the following statement today in support of President Trump’s executive order on extreme vetting:
“I commend President Trump for delivering on his campaign pledge to put a common-sense pause on a broken refugee program and immigration system that has serious national security gaps and is in desperate need of repair….
“As I have been saying for nearly two years, the refugee resettlement program poses a clear and present danger to the American people. We were told by President Obama’s own DHS, FBI and DNI Directors that U.S. intelligence officials cannot properly vet or screen refugees coming from Syria and other terrorist hot spots. We have seen the deadly consequences in Europe as ISIS has already successfully infiltrated its refugee population. Why repeat the same mistakes here?
“As a compassionate Christian, I believe we can and should help displaced refugees by caring for them in safe zones near their own countries. In fact, for the cost of bringing one refugee into America, we can help at least twelve refugees in safe zones….
“Safe zones,” what a novel idea and one that would threaten the check books of USCCB, HIAS, World Relief and their colleagues in the refugee resettlement industry.
How about we blunt the siphoning of taxpayer dollars for purposes that would undermine the Republic courtesy of the true Pagan Christians in the refugee industry.
Just last week, Tucker Carlson interviewed Kevin Appleby, a pro-refugee advocate from The Center for Migration Studies, a lobbying group for those in the business of refugee resettlement.
Appleby’s talking points which Carlson immediately destroys is that by accepting more Syrian refugees, “I would argue it makes us more secure than less secure.” [Good grief. Who writes his material!]
During the discussion, Carlson questions Appleby as to how a church can say that it is our duty as Christians to take in refugees and then force taxpayers to pick up the tab for that which the likes of Appleby “thinks is virtuous.” Appleby has no answer nor can he respond any of Carlson’s challenges. Excellent interview.
Progressives have been lying to Americans for so long, and getting away with it. If they disapprove of the line of questioning, they ignore it and move on but not with Carlson who is relentless.
While they almost always refuse to answer the questions, Carlson is sure to put them on record. Quite refreshing.
The following night Carlson interviewed Mark Hetfield of HIAS (Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society), one of the top nine social justice businesses indicated above. As you can see further up in this post, HIAS is also dependent upon the American taxpayer.
During the discussion, to make his point (fail), Hetfield invokes the Holocaust along with American moral values and like Kevin Appleby, refuses to answer the questions.
Progressives and their con games, used to silence dissent while holding its hand out for taxpayer dollars under the illusion of having compassion for others. All around, theirs is a sense of entitlement.
Example:
Planned Parenthood claims that it is “a visible and passionate advocate for policies that enable Americans to access comprehensive reproductive and sexual health care.” THEY lie. PP received by the 2015 fiscal year end $553.7 million in taxpayer dollars. while at the same time decreasing the services, it boasts about providing and increasing its number of abortions.
Anyone who objects are accused of being sexist and waging the war on women while PP snuffs out the lives of the unborn.
Teachers’ unions are never satisfied. There is no room for anyone else in their honey pot and they’re always demanding more because after all, “it is for the children.” THEY LIE as proven by their disdain for school choice, charter schools and school vouchers. On top of it all, they do not educate, they indoctrinate.
Big labor. Again, never satisfied and there is no room for anyone else in their honey pot. Again, theirs is a sense of entitlement.
No different than their fellow Progressives, those in the refugee resettlement industry have no conscience about wielding parables and calling for “compassion” as a weapon to guilt trip and manipulate one towards the desired end just as the grievance industry invokes the race card and then holds their hands out for a payoff for theirs is a sense of entitlement. Anyone who responds otherwise are labeled Islamophobes, racist, etc.
Aware of what is at stake, how Christian and how compassionate is it to ignore the agenda of incoming refugees which is to replace Christianity with Islam as the dominant religion in the United States (although Islam is not a religion), to dominate through jihad. Theirs (refugees) as well is a sense of entitlement.
Adam Ghahramani, a digital product and marketing director in New York, is an Iranian-American who penned his concerns on VentureBeat, that President Trump will prevent all Muslims from seeking asylum in these United States. He maintains that Iranians have the talent and potential to become successful, productive, good citizens, and he joined mainstream media, sundry entertainers and city officials in expressing his unfounded fears of this new administration.
An asylum of sorts may indeed be needed by the rioters who appear to be in perpetual meltdown. They articulate their doubts even when President Trump clearly iterated that he is following through on his campaign promise of security for all citizens – Christian, Jewish, and Muslim alike. In fact, based on reports by the Director of National Intelligence, the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) for the previous administration, Iran, Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Sudan and Somalia were identified by President Obama as the source of increasing terrorism. This is clearly a terror-prone region, home to only 8% of Muslims worldwide. Since January, 2009, we have had 32 terrorist attacks, with 83 fatalities and 402 injuries in the US, attributed by President Obama to these nine countries.
Iran: The US government classified the Islamic Republic of Iran as the “most active state sponsor of terrorism since 1948, both by direct attacks and by proxy through providing weapons, funds, training, and sanctuary to Hezbollah, Hamas, the Taliban, and militias in Iraq. The year 2012 showed a marked resurgence of state-sponsored terrorism not seen since the 1990s[…]
Judge Andrew Napolitano early today on Imus in the Morning radio program discussed Tuesday’s night’s hearing before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Tuesday night in Case No.: 17-35105, State of Washington & State of Minnesota v. DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States, et al.
Below is an audio of the hearing:
You can view the documents pertaining to the hearing here.
Editor’s Note: I am re-posting the following email verbatim received last night from Robert Trent on Washington state federal Judge James L. Robart’s issuance of an emergency temporary restraining order (TRO) nationwide that blocks President Trump’s executive order from being carried out.
screenshot
Written by: Lawyer, CA politician (one of the good guys) —
On the Seattle Judge’s ruling against the Trump Exec Order.
The Judge is incredibly wrong.
The Judge found that “The executive order adversely affects the state’s residents in areas of employment, education, business, family relations and freedom to travel,” Robart wrote, adding that the order also harmed the state’s public universities and tax base. “These harms are significant and ongoing.”
Note the following:
(a) Immigration is the province of the federal government not the states. According to the Supreme Court “The right to [exclude aliens] stems not alone from legislative power but is inherent in the executive power to control the foreign affairs of the nation.”
(b) Federal immigration law provides, in Section 1182(f), that “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate”
(c) Under Section 1187(a)(12), (an Obama era law) it provides that an alien is eligible for the waiver only if he or she has not been present (a) in Iraq or Syria any time after March 1, 2011; (b) in any country whose government is designated by the State Department as “repeatedly provid[ing] support for acts of international terrorism”; or (c) in any country that has been designated by the Department of Homeland Security as a country “of concern.”
Obviously, Trump’s executive is grounded firmly in the above.
(d) The Judge’s rational could be used to “block” every immigration/nation defense related law ever made let alone executive orders. Of course, federal actions of that type affect individuals within states. Really every federal law could be said to do that. It doesn’t matter if they do, however, because federal law on that topic supersedes state law and concerns.
(e) Even if the above were not true, the Judge made that finding without providing any factual basis – he just said it will have that effect.
If the Supreme Court does not overturn the order – just like this order, it will be another sad political day in the Courts.
The Supreme Court of the United States just hours ago dismissed Hawaii’s challenge to President Trump’s extreme vetting executive order remanding the case back to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for dismissal as the case is now moot due to the expiration of the 120-day pause which ends today.
Adam Ghahramani, a digital product and marketing director in New York, is an Iranian-American who penned his concerns on 
PUMABydesign001's Blog 