BIAFRA:
A Timeline of Trump’s Travel Ban: What’s Happened, And What’s Next?
19th February 2017
The battle over the order by the US government under the leadership of Donald Trump to suspend travel from seven Muslim-majority countries has evolved rapidly. Where is it now, and where does it go from here? Biafra Writers analyzes.
On the 27th of January, Trump issued an executive order suspending travel from seven Muslim-majority countries for 90 days and also suspended refugee admissions for 120 days. The order applies to permanent US residents; green-card holders, as well as foreign visitors.
On the 28th of January, a federal judge in Brooklyn, New York, protected those in transit by issuing an emergency stay of Trump’s order, stopping deportations of travelers caught up in the ban and ordering the release of travelers with valid visas who have been held at US airports.
READ THIS: BIAFRA: DONALD TRUMP AND NNAMDI KANU...THE DUO TO CHAMPION THE POSITIVE NEW WORLD ORDER
On the 29th of January, an exception was granted for green card holders. Homeland security secretary, John Kelly issued a waiver from the ban for lawful permanent residents, over the reported objections of Chief White House strategist, Steve Bannon.
On 30th of January: Washington’s Attorney General sued the Trump administration in federal court, claiming irreparable harm from the ban and asking for a temporary nationwide restraining order blocking it.
On the 1st of February, lawsuits proliferated. Four additional states and multiple individual plaintiffs sued Trump over the ban. By the 10th of February, roughly 20 lawsuits are working their way through courts across the country.
On the 3rd of February, there was a nationwide restraining order. A Washington state district court judge suspended the ban nationwide with a temporary restraining order. Travel to the US from affected countries resumed.
READ THIS TOO: BIAFRA: THE NEED FOR ISRAEL TO STRATEGICALLY POSITION BIAFRA AGAINST HER ENEMIES IN AFRICA
On the 4th of February, there was an emergency government appeal. The justice department asked a federal Appeal court for an emergency ruling to overturn the Washington state court decision. The request was denied. The Appellate court asked lawyers on both sides to provide further information.
On the 7th of February, there was a heated public hearing. The Appeal court, based in San Francisco, heard arguments by lawyers representing both the government and Washington state. Cable News carried live audio of that hearing. Tens of thousands listened online.
On the 9th of February, Trump’s government lost the appeal. The Appeal court declined to block the Washington judge’s restraining order, saying the government has provided no evidence of any threat posed by travelers from the countries in question.
MUST READ: Biafra: Why Biafra Matters To A Decolonized Africa
On the 9th of February 2017, Trump tweeted
(@realDonaldTrump)
“SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!”
So what’s next. Is Supreme court going to be the “sooner” version?
Trump’s tweet would seem to indicate that the justice department will ask the supreme court to review the appeal court decision. The supreme court may decline to do so, however, especially given the agreement of the lower courts.
“I think there’d be a good reason for the court to decline, for the same reason that all of the courts have been acting, which is, the court would see there’s no urgent threat here,” said Baher Azmy, legal director of the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights.
If the supreme court agrees to hear an emergency appeal in the case, a ruling might be expected quickly, within days, given the brisk pace of appeals so far.
But Trump may not appeal the case, Azmy said: “I don’t know politically what Trump would do. He may want to look tough and go to the supreme court. But maybe his lawyers will tell him, ‘You’ll lose,’ and that looks weak. Getting into his mind on that is anyone’s guess.”
READ THIS TOO: BIAFRA: PARADIGM SHIFT IN AMERICAN POLITICS: Donald Trump Emerges Buhari's Worst Nightmare
Regardless of whether the supreme court rules on the emergency requests in the Washington case, the High court may rule at some point in the travel ban cases, perhaps to resolve a disagreement of the lower courts that may develop.
Travel ban cases are playing out in at least four federal court districts. It could take weeks or months – longer than the duration of Trump’s executive order, and long enough perhaps for supreme court nominee Neil Gorsuch to be confirmed – for a conflict in those cases to develop and rise to the High court.
READ TOO: Biafra: Destroying The Tripartite Coalition Against Biafra: Open Letter To Donald Trump And The World
Nevertheless, the case proceeded in Washington state, and elsewhere. The district court in Washington state – the court where the temporary restraining order was issued – will continue to consider the original complaint of irreparable harm brought by Washington’s Attorney General in the coming weeks and months.
The process could result in a ruling “on the merits” of Trump’s travel ban, which would involve a detailed legal evaluation of the constitutional and statutory arguments in play. Such a ruling could be appealed, sending the case back up the chain to the San Francisco court. Other separate cases may proceed around the country.
By Chukwuemeka Chimerue
Published By IkeChukwu NwaOrisa
For Biafra Writers
A Timeline of Trump’s Travel Ban: What’s Happened, And What’s Next?
 |
| DONALD J. TRUMP |
19th February 2017
The battle over the order by the US government under the leadership of Donald Trump to suspend travel from seven Muslim-majority countries has evolved rapidly. Where is it now, and where does it go from here? Biafra Writers analyzes.
On the 27th of January, Trump issued an executive order suspending travel from seven Muslim-majority countries for 90 days and also suspended refugee admissions for 120 days. The order applies to permanent US residents; green-card holders, as well as foreign visitors.
On the 28th of January, a federal judge in Brooklyn, New York, protected those in transit by issuing an emergency stay of Trump’s order, stopping deportations of travelers caught up in the ban and ordering the release of travelers with valid visas who have been held at US airports.
READ THIS: BIAFRA: DONALD TRUMP AND NNAMDI KANU...THE DUO TO CHAMPION THE POSITIVE NEW WORLD ORDER
On the 29th of January, an exception was granted for green card holders. Homeland security secretary, John Kelly issued a waiver from the ban for lawful permanent residents, over the reported objections of Chief White House strategist, Steve Bannon.
On 30th of January: Washington’s Attorney General sued the Trump administration in federal court, claiming irreparable harm from the ban and asking for a temporary nationwide restraining order blocking it.
On the 1st of February, lawsuits proliferated. Four additional states and multiple individual plaintiffs sued Trump over the ban. By the 10th of February, roughly 20 lawsuits are working their way through courts across the country.
On the 3rd of February, there was a nationwide restraining order. A Washington state district court judge suspended the ban nationwide with a temporary restraining order. Travel to the US from affected countries resumed.
READ THIS TOO: BIAFRA: THE NEED FOR ISRAEL TO STRATEGICALLY POSITION BIAFRA AGAINST HER ENEMIES IN AFRICA
On the 4th of February, there was an emergency government appeal. The justice department asked a federal Appeal court for an emergency ruling to overturn the Washington state court decision. The request was denied. The Appellate court asked lawyers on both sides to provide further information.
On the 7th of February, there was a heated public hearing. The Appeal court, based in San Francisco, heard arguments by lawyers representing both the government and Washington state. Cable News carried live audio of that hearing. Tens of thousands listened online.
On the 9th of February, Trump’s government lost the appeal. The Appeal court declined to block the Washington judge’s restraining order, saying the government has provided no evidence of any threat posed by travelers from the countries in question.
MUST READ: Biafra: Why Biafra Matters To A Decolonized Africa
On the 9th of February 2017, Trump tweeted
(@realDonaldTrump)
“SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!”
So what’s next. Is Supreme court going to be the “sooner” version?
Trump’s tweet would seem to indicate that the justice department will ask the supreme court to review the appeal court decision. The supreme court may decline to do so, however, especially given the agreement of the lower courts.
“I think there’d be a good reason for the court to decline, for the same reason that all of the courts have been acting, which is, the court would see there’s no urgent threat here,” said Baher Azmy, legal director of the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights.
If the supreme court agrees to hear an emergency appeal in the case, a ruling might be expected quickly, within days, given the brisk pace of appeals so far.
But Trump may not appeal the case, Azmy said: “I don’t know politically what Trump would do. He may want to look tough and go to the supreme court. But maybe his lawyers will tell him, ‘You’ll lose,’ and that looks weak. Getting into his mind on that is anyone’s guess.”
READ THIS TOO: BIAFRA: PARADIGM SHIFT IN AMERICAN POLITICS: Donald Trump Emerges Buhari's Worst Nightmare
Regardless of whether the supreme court rules on the emergency requests in the Washington case, the High court may rule at some point in the travel ban cases, perhaps to resolve a disagreement of the lower courts that may develop.
Travel ban cases are playing out in at least four federal court districts. It could take weeks or months – longer than the duration of Trump’s executive order, and long enough perhaps for supreme court nominee Neil Gorsuch to be confirmed – for a conflict in those cases to develop and rise to the High court.
READ TOO: Biafra: Destroying The Tripartite Coalition Against Biafra: Open Letter To Donald Trump And The World
Nevertheless, the case proceeded in Washington state, and elsewhere. The district court in Washington state – the court where the temporary restraining order was issued – will continue to consider the original complaint of irreparable harm brought by Washington’s Attorney General in the coming weeks and months.
The process could result in a ruling “on the merits” of Trump’s travel ban, which would involve a detailed legal evaluation of the constitutional and statutory arguments in play. Such a ruling could be appealed, sending the case back up the chain to the San Francisco court. Other separate cases may proceed around the country.
By Chukwuemeka Chimerue
Published By IkeChukwu NwaOrisa
For Biafra Writers
No comments
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.