Home / Immigration News / Donald Trump Travel ban Supreme Court – Trump News

Donald Trump Travel ban Supreme Court – Trump News

Trump and the Supreme Court got it wrong. The travel ban won’t keep us safe.


President Trump walks across the South lawn of the White residence on Thursday. (Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP)

The supreme courtroom upheld President Trump’s ban on journey from 5 generally Muslim countries this week, finding that the ban had a “valid grounding in country wide safety issues” and was for this reason constitutional. Trump celebrated through calling fighters of the ban “hysterical.”

however the biggest danger to america these days does not come from immigrants, refugees or the immigration machine however from extremists of all races and religions within our own borders. The court docket’s end consequently isn’t just wrong or unjust — it’s miles downright risky.

what’s basically on the coronary heart of each the ban and the court docket ruling is a tragically previous expertise of how modern-day terrorism networks recruit for and put into effect assaults on U.S. soil.

while the al-Qaeda of the early 2000s as soon as exploited holes in the U.S. immigration device to devote attacks, nowadays’s terrorist networks have found out that the ones loopholes have long since been closed via massive advances in the U.S. vetting and immigration strategies. Al-Qaeda’s successors, along with the Islamic nation and al-Shabab, now rely heavily on attaining capacity recruits in our own country, and nowadays they goal their audiences thru online video propaganda and social media. these efforts are not in any respect affected — and consequently cannot be stopped — by means of the tour ban.

The ban’s recognition on Muslim-majority countries is also woefully out of touch with the terrorist chance to the usa. The most important content material of terrorist recruitment videos isn’t spiritual verse due to the fact recruits for terrorist networks aren’t the trustworthy. Our partners on the college of Chicago’s venture on protection and Threats launched a document in 2017 that catalogued 112 individuals indicted on prices of Islamic nation-associated offenses by using the branch of Justice between 2012 and 2014. They located that a majority of the individuals indicted had been in truth now not pious or born into Muslim households earlier than being recruited however have been radicalized via motion pictures centering on a particular narrative: that the us as a country is and could forever be an irretrievably racist, unjust and unwelcoming region for minorities. As evidence, the militant organization’s movies point to long-status violent racist organizations including the Ku Klux Klan and the u . s . a .’s history of prejudice towards Catholics, Jews, African people and, now, Muslims.

to place it any other manner, present day terrorist recruitment networks now not hate us because we’re unfastened, they hate us — in component — due to the fact many individuals aren’t loose. through enticing within the demonization and “othering” of Muslims and implementing the president’s anti-Muslim marketing campaign pledges, this journey ban mimics the Islamic state’s depiction of the united states as selectively hostile to people of Muslim faith and bolsters their recruitment efforts. All this under the banner of defensive U.S. countrywide security.

[The U.S. says it gives waivers for Trump’s travel ban. We haven’t seen any.]

the court had ample time and resources to discover what maximum veteran national safety leaders already know: The tour ban, as defined by using former countrywide security business enterprise and CIA director  Michael Hayden, is “unwarranted, it became pointless, and it was dangerous.” speaking along Hayden at an occasion in April subsidized by way of our business enterprise, simplest thru US, former protection secretary Chuck Hagel agreed that the process turned into deeply mistaken and that “the facts just don’t bear out that immigrants are wreaking havoc and terror on americans considering that 2001 … by any metric or any trendy of application that you’d observe to this issue.”

it’s miles telling that fifty two former national safety leaders — together with 5 former CIA administrators, two former protection secretaries, two secretaries of nation and numerous different senior officers charged with preserving americans safe over the past three administrations — wrote a letter to the court outlining the fake country wide safety claim to the travel ban. The leaders described that the travel bans 1.zero, 2.zero and 3.0 did not emerge from a cautious interagency review through countrywide security and foreign coverage workplaces, and that the third ban “so carefully reflect[ed] the original ban in shape and substance that any additional ‘method’ the government now cites cannot dispel this original sin [of the first].”

a number of the brief’s authors have been current on lively intelligence regarding credible terrorist threat streams directed in opposition to the us as recently as one week before the issuance of the original Jan. 27, 2017, government order. by assessment, the sole amicus quick via country wide security figures in assist of the ban included a paltry six names, which include Frank Gaffney Jr., the founder and president of the middle for security policy (indexed via the Southern Poverty regulation middle as an anti-Muslim extremist group), however no longer a single cupboard-stage reliable.

most people’s opinion agreed that the management had engaged in a extreme interagency review of dangers posed by out of doors nations to the usa — despite the fact that those effects have by no means been made public. but, because the dissent noted, it’s far completely irresponsible to don’t forget any model of the travel ban without placing it inside the context of candidate Donald Trump’s campaign promise to institute “a whole and total shutdown of Muslims getting into our us of a,” his announcement that “Islam hates us” and his movements to stack his management with virulently anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant figures (considered one of whom, Frank Wuco, turned into explicitly mentioned inJustice Sonia Sotomayor’s dissent) which include Stephen Miller, an architect of the first version of the ban, and Secretary of country Mike Pompeo, who’ve stated that Islam poses a risk to Western civilization and that American Muslims are ability threats with the aid of virtue in their faith. people with such a document of anti-Muslim statements are essentially unqualified to adopt any assessment about potential threats posed by way of Muslim-majority international locations to the us.

[I risked my life for the U.S. Army. But when I came here, I was detained.]

we’ve got labored on distinctive sides of the usa’ response to 9/11: one of us in Iraq, Guantanamo Bay and the Pentagon advising three protection secretaries, and the other serving our Iraqi coalition partners looking for safe haven from targeted violence at the peak of the struggle. whether paying attention to inmates at Guantanamo Bay describing how recruiters encouraged them with memories of U.S. injustice or watching as we turned our backs on Iraqis who laid their lives on the line for us, we each developed a deep appreciation for the gravity of our responsibilities as americans — to justice, to humanity and to our own values.

the ones responsibilities today imply building sober coverage based on proof, now not worry, as well as fostering meaningful partnerships with our allies abroad. Trump’s tour ban and the supreme court ruling undermine the us’ potential to fulfill the ones responsibilities. The ban distracts from actual threats and is driven by prejudice and worry — two emotions that neither make for accurate coverage nor maintain us more secure at night time.

The Muslim tour ban is simply the modern in a long string of factless, fear-based policy picks that together have made us much less safe, much less faithful to our values and greater remoted as a rustic. That the ban was upheld Tuesday via the best courtroom within the land is extra than disappointing; it locations us squarely, and ever greater vulnerably, on the wrong side of history.