Protestors hold up signs in front of effigies of U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin during in a demonstration on January 29, 2017 in Seattle, Washington, against Trump's executive order banning Muslims from certain countries. The rally was one of several in the area over the weekend. (Photo by Stephen Brashear/Getty Images)
As 'Disgraceful' Muslim Ban Looms, Rights Groups Vow Resistance
New guidelines "should leave no doubt that the Trump administration will exploit any opportunity to advance its xenophobic agenda."
As President Donald Trump's "disgraceful and discriminatory" Muslim ban--which was partially reinstated by the Supreme Court earlier this week--is set to go into effect Thursday night, rights groups and attorneys are preparing to challenge the administration's "arbitrary" restrictions on who is permitted to enter the country.
"It remains clear that President Trump's purpose is to disparage and condemn Muslims."
--Omar Jadwat, ACLUCamille Mackler, director of legal initiatives at the New York Immigration Coalition, told CBS New York that lawyers will be ready to offer assistance to immigrants should any problems arise.
"We have an army of over 1,000 lawyers who have their back and are ready to go back out to [the John F. Kennedy International Airport] if that becomes necessary," she said.
The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that only those who could demonstrate a "bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States" would be allowed entry.
But, as the New York Times noted, the "meaning of 'bona fide relationship' was not precisely explained, and the phrase has created much uncertainty for migrants and others seeking to travel to the United States from the six countries--Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen--covered by the revised travel ban that President Trump issued in March."
Late Wednesday night, the State Department sent a diplomatic cable--published by Reuters--offering its interpretation of the court's mandate and detailing who would be exempt from the ban.
It judged that those with "close family"--defined as "a parent (including parent-in-law), spouse, child, adult son or daughter, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, sibling, whether whole or half"--living in the U.S. would be permitted to enter.
"'Close family' does not include grandparents, grandchildren, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, cousins, brothers-laws and sisters-in-law, fiances, and any other 'extended' family members," the cable adds.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) quickly objected to this definition, calling it "extremely restrictive."
Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project, argued the State Department's directive "does not comport with the Supreme Court's order, is arbitrary, and is not tied to any legitimate government purpose."
"It remains clear that President Trump's purpose is to disparage and condemn Muslims," Jadwat concluded.
Karen Tumlin, director of the National Immigration Law Center, agreed, saying in a statement that the "reported guidance would slam the door shut on so many who have waited for months or years to be reunited with their families."
The State Department's guidelines "should leave no doubt that the Trump administration will exploit any opportunity to advance its xenophobic agenda," Tumlin concluded.
We are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. In a few short weeks, US voters will have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. Our Fall Campaign is underway, and we need your help. To power our newsroom through the rest of the year, we need to raise $125,000 by midnight on October 31. So if you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
As President Donald Trump's "disgraceful and discriminatory" Muslim ban--which was partially reinstated by the Supreme Court earlier this week--is set to go into effect Thursday night, rights groups and attorneys are preparing to challenge the administration's "arbitrary" restrictions on who is permitted to enter the country.
"It remains clear that President Trump's purpose is to disparage and condemn Muslims."
--Omar Jadwat, ACLUCamille Mackler, director of legal initiatives at the New York Immigration Coalition, told CBS New York that lawyers will be ready to offer assistance to immigrants should any problems arise.
"We have an army of over 1,000 lawyers who have their back and are ready to go back out to [the John F. Kennedy International Airport] if that becomes necessary," she said.
The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that only those who could demonstrate a "bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States" would be allowed entry.
But, as the New York Times noted, the "meaning of 'bona fide relationship' was not precisely explained, and the phrase has created much uncertainty for migrants and others seeking to travel to the United States from the six countries--Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen--covered by the revised travel ban that President Trump issued in March."
Late Wednesday night, the State Department sent a diplomatic cable--published by Reuters--offering its interpretation of the court's mandate and detailing who would be exempt from the ban.
It judged that those with "close family"--defined as "a parent (including parent-in-law), spouse, child, adult son or daughter, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, sibling, whether whole or half"--living in the U.S. would be permitted to enter.
"'Close family' does not include grandparents, grandchildren, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, cousins, brothers-laws and sisters-in-law, fiances, and any other 'extended' family members," the cable adds.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) quickly objected to this definition, calling it "extremely restrictive."
Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project, argued the State Department's directive "does not comport with the Supreme Court's order, is arbitrary, and is not tied to any legitimate government purpose."
"It remains clear that President Trump's purpose is to disparage and condemn Muslims," Jadwat concluded.
Karen Tumlin, director of the National Immigration Law Center, agreed, saying in a statement that the "reported guidance would slam the door shut on so many who have waited for months or years to be reunited with their families."
The State Department's guidelines "should leave no doubt that the Trump administration will exploit any opportunity to advance its xenophobic agenda," Tumlin concluded.
As President Donald Trump's "disgraceful and discriminatory" Muslim ban--which was partially reinstated by the Supreme Court earlier this week--is set to go into effect Thursday night, rights groups and attorneys are preparing to challenge the administration's "arbitrary" restrictions on who is permitted to enter the country.
"It remains clear that President Trump's purpose is to disparage and condemn Muslims."
--Omar Jadwat, ACLUCamille Mackler, director of legal initiatives at the New York Immigration Coalition, told CBS New York that lawyers will be ready to offer assistance to immigrants should any problems arise.
"We have an army of over 1,000 lawyers who have their back and are ready to go back out to [the John F. Kennedy International Airport] if that becomes necessary," she said.
The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that only those who could demonstrate a "bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States" would be allowed entry.
But, as the New York Times noted, the "meaning of 'bona fide relationship' was not precisely explained, and the phrase has created much uncertainty for migrants and others seeking to travel to the United States from the six countries--Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen--covered by the revised travel ban that President Trump issued in March."
Late Wednesday night, the State Department sent a diplomatic cable--published by Reuters--offering its interpretation of the court's mandate and detailing who would be exempt from the ban.
It judged that those with "close family"--defined as "a parent (including parent-in-law), spouse, child, adult son or daughter, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, sibling, whether whole or half"--living in the U.S. would be permitted to enter.
"'Close family' does not include grandparents, grandchildren, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, cousins, brothers-laws and sisters-in-law, fiances, and any other 'extended' family members," the cable adds.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) quickly objected to this definition, calling it "extremely restrictive."
Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project, argued the State Department's directive "does not comport with the Supreme Court's order, is arbitrary, and is not tied to any legitimate government purpose."
"It remains clear that President Trump's purpose is to disparage and condemn Muslims," Jadwat concluded.
Karen Tumlin, director of the National Immigration Law Center, agreed, saying in a statement that the "reported guidance would slam the door shut on so many who have waited for months or years to be reunited with their families."
The State Department's guidelines "should leave no doubt that the Trump administration will exploit any opportunity to advance its xenophobic agenda," Tumlin concluded.