Travel Ban & the Courts

I believe it is widely known that the vast majority of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil since September 11th, 2001 have not been committed by foreign nationals, but let's serve some meat with those potatoes. The following is from an article in Forbes.  Now I'm willing to bet that trump would not brand this as 'fake news' because it's from a magazine that I feel sure he has consistently read over the years.  After all, Forbes is all about money, just like trump.  The title of the graph says it all:



http://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2017/01/31/most-terrorists-in-the-u-s-since-911-have-been-american-citizens-or-legal-residents-infographic/#2f3c2cfa482c

Furthermore, the article points out that, "In fact, every single jihadist who conducted a lethal attack inside the U.S. in the post 9/11 era was either a citizen or legal resident. No fatal attacks were committed by terrorists from the countries restricted by [t]rump's travel ban."  Again, we all know this information because we, the choir, are reading the music.  But, what about those that do not, cannot or refuse to read the music.  There's a lot of people in our country that are in this other choir.  They read a different musical score.  There is a major schism in our country.  To millions our music sounds dissonant and to us, their music sounds the same.  The decibel level has reached a deafening level.

trump was elected by the choir that sounds dissonant to us (I say 'us' because i believe that those reading this blog are of the same ilk as me).  Even though our choir is larger, he managed to garner the required number of Electoral College votes to gain the Presidency.  trump (goebbels-bannon really) has taken it upon himself to enact the seven nation 90 day travel ban and 120 day minimum refugee ban.  Pleasing music to the 46%.  And now the court battle.

Yes, Seattle Federal  Judge James Robart, a George W. Bush appointee, handed down an injunction halting the ban. Now onto the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.  The problem here, as i see it, is that as in any court the burden of proof is on the plaintiff.

The plaintiffs in this case are the Attorneys General of Washington State & Minnesota.  Their claim is that trump's executive order, "violates the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment to the Constitution because it shows government preference for one religion over another, and Equal Protection Clause -- part of the 14th Amendment -- because it discriminates based on religion and national origin."  As is my standard operating procedure, I have looked up both Amendments which read as follows:

- First Amendment - Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


- 14th Amendment -
   - section 1 - All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

   - section 2 - Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

   - section 3 - No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

   - section 4 - The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

   - section 5 - The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

I am sad to say that these two amendments really do not apply to the issue of foreign nationals traveling to our country. Also, the First Amendment only applies to actions by Congress.  Next I looked at the executive order and the first law referenced in the order.  In section 3, clause c.), the order refers to the folowing:

1. U.S. Code › Title 8 › Chapter 12 › Subchapter II › Part II › § 1182

(f)Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

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 nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate. Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline.

So.......per the code referenced above, it appears trump is within his authority.  I am not a lawyer, but to me logic dictates that it appears that trump has the authority, BUT the question remains, is the law referenced in the order Constitutional?  That is the hinge that the case will swing on, as far as I can see.  No matter who prevails in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals today, this case will end up in The Supreme Court.

Writing this post has been very difficult because I certainly do not want to admit that trump and goebbels-bannon have the legal right to do anything, but I am compelled to read and follow the law while being blind to the entities involved.