President Trump’s first attempt at a refugee and visa ban was halted by a Maryland federal judge. So the President tried again. This ban was more narrowly focused and more thoughtfully-considered. But it was also halted, this time by a federal judge in Hawaii.
The reasoning behind this halt is fairly simple. U.S. District Judge Derrick K. Watson stated in his opinion that,
a reasonable, objective observer — enlightened by the specific historical context, contemporaneous public statements, and specific sequence of events leading to its issuance — would conclude that the Executive Order was issued with a purpose to disfavor a particular religion.
Despite repeated claims by President Trump and officials from his administration that these attempted bans were “not about religion”, the courts have vociferously disagreed.
The President, in response to this latest halt, told supporters at a rally in Nashville that his administration would fight the case as far as it needs to go, further declaring that the second attempt at a ban was regrettable. They should go back to the first one, the President said.
He also argued that “the danger is clear, the law is clear, the need for my executive order is clear”.
The danger to United States national security posed by immigrants, specifically undocumented immigrants, is the crux of the argument in favor of these bans. The President and members of his administration believe the President to be within his rights, protecting national security, to issue executive orders instituting such bans.
President Trump’s quote is the distillation of this logic.
The bans may even harm U.S. national security, according to numerous ex-national security officials.
There is very little, if any, danger posed to U.S. national security by illegal immigrants. The bans are illegal.
Thereby, there is no need for such an executive order. Quote (and logic) needs work.
Follow @armchairmidrash on Twitter to get notifications of the latest posts and to continue the conversation.