SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Trump's Muslim Ban 2.0, "Dripping With Intolerance," Ruled Unconstitutional
'Over and over we are seeing the courts and the public soundly reject this blatant attempt to write bigotry into law'
May 25, 2017
A federal appeals court ruled Thursday that President Donald Trump's revised Muslim Ban, issued in March and lambasted by rights groups, is unconstitutional.
The full Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals heard the case earlier this month. In a 10-3 decision (pdf) on Thursday, the panel upheld a lower court's nationwide preliminary injunction on Trump's executive order, which blocked for 90 days people from Sudan, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen. The revised order, like the one it replaced, also suspended the nation's refugee program for 120 days and reduced the annual number of refugees to 50,000 from 120,000.
Citing statements made by Trump and surrogates, the Fourth Circuit ruling said the majority was "unconvinced" that the order "has more to do with national security than it does with effectuating the president's proposed Muslim ban." On the 2016 campaign trail, Trump called for a "total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States."
The ruling refers to an executive order "that in text speaks with vague words of national security, but in context drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination."
It continues:
Congress granted the President broad power to deny entry to aliens, but that power is not absolute. It cannot go unchecked when, as here, the President wields it through an executive edict that stands to cause irreparable harm to individuals across this nation
Rights groups celebrated the decision.
"President Trump's Muslim ban violates the Constitution, as this decision strongly reaffirms," said Omar Jadwat, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's (ACLU) Immigrants' Rights Project, who argued the case. "The Constitution's prohibition on actions disfavoring or condemning any religion is a fundamental protection for all of us, and we can all be glad that the court today rejected the government's request to set that principle aside."
Margaret Huang, executive director of Amnesty International USA, added: "Over and over we are seeing the courts and the public soundly reject this blatant attempt to write bigotry into law. Rather then wait for yet another court to rule against it, Congress can and must take action that will end this discriminatory and dangerous policy once and for all."
Lawmakers also weighed in:
CNN, whose legal analyst Steve Vladeck called the decision a "huge loss" for Trump, described Thursday's ruling as "the latest step on a likely trip to the Supreme Court." The White House has not yet issued a statement.
Meanwhile, Karen Tumlin, legal director of the National Immigration Law Center, offered a sobering reminder: "While the spotlight today is on the Muslim ban, the truth is that this executive order is just one part of President Trump's xenophobic agenda. We will continue to fight to ensure that all people--regardless of where they were born, what they earn, or how they pray--can live freely and be treated fairly in this country."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Deirdre Fulton
Deirdre Fulton is a former Common Dreams senior editor and staff writer. Previously she worked as an editor and writer for the Portland Phoenix and the Boston Phoenix, where she was honored by the New England Press Association and the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies. A Boston University graduate, Deirdre is a co-founder of the Maine-based Lorem Ipsum Theater Collective and the PortFringe theater festival. She writes young adult fiction in her spare time.
A federal appeals court ruled Thursday that President Donald Trump's revised Muslim Ban, issued in March and lambasted by rights groups, is unconstitutional.
The full Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals heard the case earlier this month. In a 10-3 decision (pdf) on Thursday, the panel upheld a lower court's nationwide preliminary injunction on Trump's executive order, which blocked for 90 days people from Sudan, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen. The revised order, like the one it replaced, also suspended the nation's refugee program for 120 days and reduced the annual number of refugees to 50,000 from 120,000.
Citing statements made by Trump and surrogates, the Fourth Circuit ruling said the majority was "unconvinced" that the order "has more to do with national security than it does with effectuating the president's proposed Muslim ban." On the 2016 campaign trail, Trump called for a "total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States."
The ruling refers to an executive order "that in text speaks with vague words of national security, but in context drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination."
It continues:
Congress granted the President broad power to deny entry to aliens, but that power is not absolute. It cannot go unchecked when, as here, the President wields it through an executive edict that stands to cause irreparable harm to individuals across this nation
Rights groups celebrated the decision.
"President Trump's Muslim ban violates the Constitution, as this decision strongly reaffirms," said Omar Jadwat, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's (ACLU) Immigrants' Rights Project, who argued the case. "The Constitution's prohibition on actions disfavoring or condemning any religion is a fundamental protection for all of us, and we can all be glad that the court today rejected the government's request to set that principle aside."
Margaret Huang, executive director of Amnesty International USA, added: "Over and over we are seeing the courts and the public soundly reject this blatant attempt to write bigotry into law. Rather then wait for yet another court to rule against it, Congress can and must take action that will end this discriminatory and dangerous policy once and for all."
Lawmakers also weighed in:
CNN, whose legal analyst Steve Vladeck called the decision a "huge loss" for Trump, described Thursday's ruling as "the latest step on a likely trip to the Supreme Court." The White House has not yet issued a statement.
Meanwhile, Karen Tumlin, legal director of the National Immigration Law Center, offered a sobering reminder: "While the spotlight today is on the Muslim ban, the truth is that this executive order is just one part of President Trump's xenophobic agenda. We will continue to fight to ensure that all people--regardless of where they were born, what they earn, or how they pray--can live freely and be treated fairly in this country."
Deirdre Fulton
Deirdre Fulton is a former Common Dreams senior editor and staff writer. Previously she worked as an editor and writer for the Portland Phoenix and the Boston Phoenix, where she was honored by the New England Press Association and the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies. A Boston University graduate, Deirdre is a co-founder of the Maine-based Lorem Ipsum Theater Collective and the PortFringe theater festival. She writes young adult fiction in her spare time.
A federal appeals court ruled Thursday that President Donald Trump's revised Muslim Ban, issued in March and lambasted by rights groups, is unconstitutional.
The full Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals heard the case earlier this month. In a 10-3 decision (pdf) on Thursday, the panel upheld a lower court's nationwide preliminary injunction on Trump's executive order, which blocked for 90 days people from Sudan, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen. The revised order, like the one it replaced, also suspended the nation's refugee program for 120 days and reduced the annual number of refugees to 50,000 from 120,000.
Citing statements made by Trump and surrogates, the Fourth Circuit ruling said the majority was "unconvinced" that the order "has more to do with national security than it does with effectuating the president's proposed Muslim ban." On the 2016 campaign trail, Trump called for a "total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States."
The ruling refers to an executive order "that in text speaks with vague words of national security, but in context drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination."
It continues:
Congress granted the President broad power to deny entry to aliens, but that power is not absolute. It cannot go unchecked when, as here, the President wields it through an executive edict that stands to cause irreparable harm to individuals across this nation
Rights groups celebrated the decision.
"President Trump's Muslim ban violates the Constitution, as this decision strongly reaffirms," said Omar Jadwat, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's (ACLU) Immigrants' Rights Project, who argued the case. "The Constitution's prohibition on actions disfavoring or condemning any religion is a fundamental protection for all of us, and we can all be glad that the court today rejected the government's request to set that principle aside."
Margaret Huang, executive director of Amnesty International USA, added: "Over and over we are seeing the courts and the public soundly reject this blatant attempt to write bigotry into law. Rather then wait for yet another court to rule against it, Congress can and must take action that will end this discriminatory and dangerous policy once and for all."
Lawmakers also weighed in:
CNN, whose legal analyst Steve Vladeck called the decision a "huge loss" for Trump, described Thursday's ruling as "the latest step on a likely trip to the Supreme Court." The White House has not yet issued a statement.
Meanwhile, Karen Tumlin, legal director of the National Immigration Law Center, offered a sobering reminder: "While the spotlight today is on the Muslim ban, the truth is that this executive order is just one part of President Trump's xenophobic agenda. We will continue to fight to ensure that all people--regardless of where they were born, what they earn, or how they pray--can live freely and be treated fairly in this country."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.