Posted on 03/27/2017 9:20:52 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Representatives from 13 states including 12 state attorneys general and one governor filed a motion in support of President Trump’s temporary travel ban. From the Dallas Morning News:
Attorney General Ken Paxton on Monday led a coalition of 13 states in filing a brief with the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals defending President Donald Trump’s revised immigration order.
In the brief, Paxton and representatives from 12 other states argue that the Trump administration’s new order is legal and falls under the president’s power over foreign affairs and national security.
Those joining the brief included Paxton plus AG’s in the states of Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, and West Virginia. Governor Phil Bryant of Mississippi also joined.
The brief makes several arguments starting with President Trump’s authority to make decisions about immigration, especially with regard to national security. The brief also argues previous courts have erred in suggesting that non-resident aliens have rights under the U.S. Constitution. From the brief:
Plaintiffs’ constitutional challenges rest on the flawed premise that the United States Constitution confers on nonresident foreign citizens, located abroad, rights regarding admission into this country. But it is “clear” that “an unadmitted and nonresident alien” “ha[s] no constitutional right of entry to this country as a nonimmigrant or otherwise.” Mandel, 408 U.S. at 762. The “power to admit or exclude aliens is a sovereign prerogative,” and aliens seeking admission to the United States request a “privilege.” Landon v. Plasencia, 459 U.S. 21, 32 (1982).
Finally, the brief argues that even if nonresident aliens were granted constitutional rights, Trump’s executive order is not unconstitutional because it doesn’t make any reference to religion:
The Executive Order classifies aliens by nationality—not religion. The Executive Order’s temporary pause in entry by nationals from six countries and in the refugee program neither mentions any religion nor depends on whether affected aliens are Muslim. See EO §§ 2, 3, 6. These provisions distinguish among aliens only by nationality. Id. Thus, the Executive Order is emphatically not a “Muslim ban.” Indeed, numerous Muslim-majority countries in the world were not covered by the seven-country list used in the prior Executive Order,6 and the Pew Research Center estimates that this list from the prior Executive Order “would affect only about 12% of the world’s Muslims.”
Judges in Hawaii and Maryland have blocked implementation of the temporary travel ban while its merits are being challenged in court. Last week the Trump administration got a boost when a judge in Virginia ruled the revised travel ban was lawful. Judge Anthony Trenga wrote, “it is no longer likely that plaintiffs can succeed on their claim that the predominate purpose of EO-2 is to discriminate against Muslims based on their religion.”
courts have erred in suggesting that non-resident aliens have rights under the U.S. Constitution.
Plaintiffs’ constitutional challenges rest on the flawed premise that the United States Constitution confers on nonresident foreign citizens, located abroad, rights regarding admission into this country. But it is “clear” that “an unadmitted and nonresident alien” “ha[s] no constitutional right of entry to this country as a nonimmigrant or otherwise.” Mandel, 408 U.S. at 762. The “power to admit or exclude aliens is a sovereign prerogative,” and aliens seeking admission to the United States request a “privilege.” Landon v. Plasencia, 459 U.S. 21, 32 (1982).
Alabama,
Arizona,
Arkansas,
Florida,
Kansas,
Louisiana,
Mississippi,
Montana,
Oklahoma,
South Carolina,
South Dakota,
Texas,
West Virginia
Good! Thanks for posting.
Thanks for posting that—very important reference!
GREAT News!
MAGA!
Imagine that! Foreigners in foreign countries do not have a 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
Yahoo, states. You must join the battle for the life of USA.
About effing time somebody stood up for what Trump is trying to do.
Maybe America should secede from these judges... Judgexit it is
<>Trump’s executive order is not unconstitutional because it doesn’t make any reference to religion.<>
Someone please explain to me why a ban on the entry of muslims would be unconstitutional.
Seriously is that ALL.
There has to be more out there that will sign this and support this "ban" on the invasion of our homeland by the Islamic goathumpers sworn to destroy our way of life.
Has to be more to support our Freedom and way of life. If not, Ken Paxton next draft needs to be papers calling for #TEXIT, a sovereign Republic of Texas again.
Encouraging news.
Tennessee??? Hello?
Nice.
I think Haslam waits to see which way the wind blows before deciding to join the most popular side. Sad.
I see Big Boy (Trump’s pal) is not listed. Not surprising as he is such a POS. NJ has had another lowering of it’s credit rating - 13 so far I think!
What else is new?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.