What Manner of Government Administration Calls to its Depraved Hateful Base Via Inhumane Acts?
Sadly, the willingness or ability of the non-Jewish populations to rescue Jewish lives never matched the Nazis’ vehement desire to destroy them.
And now …
The Trump administration’s refugee and border policies cruelly ignore the lessons of the past
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2018/05/27/the-trump-administrations-refugee-and-border-policies-cruelly-ignore-the-lessons-of-the-past/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.71de943d1eed
________________________________________________________________
RED BOX RULE … Let your humanity guide your comments.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
128 visitors
"Things Equal to the Same Things are Equal to Each Other!" _ Euclid *
______________________________________________
Do spare us the Godwin's Law protest … and understand that Godwin himself, posited a corollary!
Following the controversial Unite The Right Rally neo-Nazi gathering in August 2017, Mike Godwin responded to the controversy on Twitter. On August 13th, 2017, he tweeted [15] …
"By all means, compare these shitheads to Nazis. Again and again. I'm with you." The tweet (shown below) received more than 20,000 retweets and 48,000 likes in less than a week."
Enforcing border security and national sovereignty is now equated to concentration camps and genocide? This is why the left is not taken seriously.
If a burglar breaks into my house and I call the police, then I’m the bad guy and the people who hide him so he can escape justice are the good guys because keeping criminals (and their children) out of my house is like running a Nazi death camp. I really don’t see how anybody can believe this nonsense let alone tell it to anybody else with a straight face.
Kindred Spirits
Another swing and a miss by A.Mac. Is there a subject or topic in that typographical mess somewhere!
Yeah, let them all in, vetted or not, criminal or not, carrying unknown disease and vermin....and release them into the greater population. Another example of left wing magically beneficent thinking....
Another swing and a miss by A.Mac. Is there a subject or topic in that typographical mess somewhere!
Yeah, let them all in, vetted or not, criminal or not, carrying unknown disease and vermin....and release them into the greater population. Another example of left wing magically beneficent thinking..
Read the legal options and pretend the typography spells words, and, that the words have definitions, and, that altogether, they make sentences … which provide information and express ideas.
Conservative compassion and evangelical supporting ideology … noted.
I guess habits formed in kindergarten are kinda hard to break
Try reading the Constitution A. Mac. Better yet, try to get your "party" to start following the Constitution.
What Manner Of Government Administration Calls To Its Depraved Hateful Base Via Inhumane Acts?
IF the numbers are there for full-control I'll be surprised and disappointed in humanity and fearful for our future for damn sure. Even more so than after the election.
However after the reality of the last election I'd be much less surprises than before.
sad
I think comparing the deportation of aliens who knowingly and deliberately snuck into the country illegally to the extermination of innocent citizens because they were Jewish is beyond ridiculous. Illegal aliens are simply being removed the same way you remove trespassers and burglars from your property. They knew the risk when they entered and the consequences of being caught. Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time —Baretta TV show.
Not so … I posted the law on asylum seekers and temporary protected status.
AND THE ARTICLE IS ABOUT SEPARATING FAMILIES WHO ARE NOT IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW IF THE SEEK ASYLUM OR TEMPORARY PROTECTED STATUS.
We are talking about children imporperly separated from parents … and not how the laws have been properly imposed … rather how they are being insidiously imposed to pander to xenophobic Trump supporters.
Liberals dismiss everybody who disagrees with them as a “phobe” or an “ist.” The parents are the ones who decided to either bring their children with them when they violated the law or reproduce irresponsibly, knowing that they could be deported when caught. This is no different to me than trespassers and burglars who bring their children with them when they enter my property illegally and then have the gall to demand that their children be allowed to stay because they’re children. No family need be separated. The illegal aliens can take their children with them when they go and learn to respect the law before they attempt to come back. I’m opposed to any immigration reform until we get straight that illegal aliens should be deported and that sanctuary cities are an obstruction of justice.
The left has lost the argument on this issue. Get a grip and give it up.
Liberals dismiss everybody who disagrees with them as a “phobe” or an “ist.” The parents are the ones who decided to either bring their children with them when they violated the law or reproduce irresponsibly, knowing that they could be deported when caught. This is no different to me than trespassers and burglars who bring their children with them when they enter my property illegally and then have the gall to demand that their children be allowed to stay because they’re children. No family need be separated. The illegal aliens can take their children with them when they go and learn to respect the law before they attempt to come back. I’m opposed to any immigration reform until we get straight that illegal aliens should be deported and that sanctuary cities are an obstruction of justice.
Don't broad brush dismiss this by misrepresenting legitimate-asylum-seekers as trespassers and burglars …
You can ignore the realities of the legal options … but don't make the argument xenophobes, and/or those politicians who have misled both the willing and unknowing dupes have made.
Option 4 – Asylum
You can apply for the right to stay in the U.S. if you qualify for asylum and apply within one year of your entry or the expiration of your authorized stay.
You’ll need to show that you have been persecuted, or fear future persecution, in your home country, based on your race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group.
The process involves submitting an application, together with detailed documentation of your membership in the group that you claim and the persecution that you faced or fear.
If you are granted asylum, you can apply for a green card one year after your approval, and for U.S. citizenship four years after that. (If denied, you will be deported.).
Option 5 – Temporary Protected Status
If you come from a country that has recently had a civil war, environmental or natural disaster, or other trouble that makes it unsafe for its citizens to return there, the United States may offer what’s known as Temporary Protected Status or “TPS.”
This is not a green card, nor does it lead to a green card. However, TPS would allow you to stay in the United States legally for a set amount of time (maximum 18 months), and to receive a work permit while you’re here. See the USCIS website ( www.uscis.gov ) for details and the list of currently eligible countries.
If you lived in a country in which your children were subjected to, i.e. human trafficking, and, no way to protect them other than hoping for asylum in a civilized country that might show compassion and enable your children to live a relatively normal life …
Get educated and come back … and instead of a pronouncement and a dismissive "argument," discuss the legal options, which, you certainly have the right to decry … but the existence of which you cannot accurately deny.
By yours, and the legally-flawed arguments of some others, Native Americans could make an argument today, that out white-ass ancestors should have been kicked out of Jamestown before it was stolen and named …
… "Jamestown!"
“ If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell”
― Carl SandburgDoes that broad brush also apply to painting those who disagree with you as xenophobes?
I haven’t ignored anything. Illegal aliens can, and do, assert both options 4 and 5 after being caught sneaking across the border (just like a burglar can claim to have innocently gone to the wrong house via and open window) but it doesn’t immunize them from being arrested.
It's disingenuous
There is no rational comparison between immigration enforcement and Nazi genocide. Comparing what you think is actual and concluding that what you think is the reality when it isn’t is . . . only real to you.
I said nothing of slaughter! We are talking about separating children from parents as a form of deterrent in keeping from people seeking asylum. Inhumanity at any level is just that.
It was disgusting and an insult to the victims of the holocaust.
So, let me get this straight. You are taking Obama's policies that are currently still in place under Trump and NOW they are offensive? When did they become offensive? Let me guess, January 2017. And it STILL took 18 months for it to become fully offensive.
I have explained this once, but, again …
While There has always been a policy of separating children from parents at the border when the adults are facing criminal charges but — and it’s a big caveat — the current administration is manipulating the policy to deter migration.
To be perfectly clear, the U.S. has had a long-standing policy of family separation when the parents face a criminal charge, like illegal entry.
What changed was the enactment of the “ zero tolerance ” policy that requires all parents who cross illegally be put in criminal proceedings … rather than the more expedient civil removal proceedings. It removes the choice of law enforcement — otherwise known as prosecutorial discretion, used by both Presidents Bush and Obama — and requires law enforcement to charge parents with illegal entry even if they claim legal asylum.
As it always has been. But, you didn't seem too concerned until January 2017. And like I said, it STILL took 18 months for it to become fully offensive.
ZERO should have been the tolerance level from the start. But then again, left / liberals and Democrats welcomed them with open arms and demanded they be treated as US citizens when they should have been herded up and shipped back.
Your outrage on this really shows the hypocrasy of the left / liberals and Democrats.
Sanctuary cities are acting as hideouts for all illegal aliens (not just those “legitimately” seeking asylum) and eroding border enforcement. If sanctuary cities are determined to act as a hideout for illegal aliens, then Trump can counterbalance it on the enforcement end with a zero tolerance policy. In any event, aliens can solve this problem immediately by ceasing to cross the border illegally and dragging their children with them when they do it.
I'll take my chances.
Care to discuss the law, how and why it is implemented as it is?
Read the information instead of turning a blind eye because it suits your preferences.
I fail to see the comparison of dragging people from their homes and murdering them, as the Nazis did, and not opening the doors to allow open immigration from other countries without proper vetting or compliance to a point system requiring beneficial aspects.
Do you see any comparison in sending Jews back to Germany by the U.S. in 1939?
When oppressed human beings seek asylum … and they are turned away … and, in order to stoke popular opinion, are stereotyped and denigrated to appease a voter demographic, we compromise our humanity.
There are many illegals in the U.S. … but only certain nationalities get the Trump demagoguery …
This is who the Trump base and supporters are. Only when they lose something dear to them will the hurtful and evil policies of this Administration be acknowledged.
The European Union has opened the doors to anyone who can drag themselves past their borders, including those simply seeking a more comfortable (welfare benefits) life, terrorists hiding among the many, those who will refuse to assimilate or live by the laws of the land, and the countries it forces to admit them are paying the price. Not ALL refugees are escaping politically or religiously sanctioned murder or destruction of their life. I did not criticize admitting GENUINE refugees.
Those on board the SS St. Louis were not there because they just wanted to live a more comfortable life, they were trying to escape not the possibility, but the absolute future of being slaughtered. Such GENUINE refugees should not be refused.
Those on board the SS St. Louis were not there because they just wanted to live a more comfortable life, they were trying to escape not the possibility, but the absolute future of being slaughtered. Such GENUINE refugees should not be refused.
And do you decide arbitrarily that there are no current refugees trying to escape the realities of the dangers in their countries?
Gang warfare and violence have transformed parts of Central America into some of the most dangerous places on earth. In recent years, El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala (known as the Northern Triangle) have experienced a dramatic escalation in organized crime by gangs, called maras.
Thousands of parents have fled with their families and, in many cases, children have made the perilous journey alone. These unaccompanied children are some of the world’s most vulnerable refugees – they have witnessed horrific violence and faced extreme risk. UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, is on the ground responding to this mounting crisis, but the needs are growing.
Current homicide rates are among the highest ever recorded in Central America. Several cities, including San Salvador, Tegucigalpa and San Pedro Sula, are among the 10 most dangerous in the world. The most visible evidence of violence is the high rate of brutal homicides, but other human rights abuses are on the rise, including the recruitment of children into gangs, extortion and sexual violence.
From 2011 to 2016, the number of people from the Northern Triangle who have sought refuge in surrounding countries has increased by 2,249 percent. The majority fleeing are women and children.
In 2016, 388,000 people fled the region – more continued to flee in 2017. The rapid growth of those forced from their homes is quickly outstripping available resources, leaving many vulnerable children, women and men without physical and legal protection.
_________________________________________________
Any entity that murders innocents is like any other that does the same. And because the innocents are brown … does not make them any less innocent!
It seems to me that you're focusing on immigrants from the south whereas I'm more concerned about those from elsewhere, but your desire for an open-door policy still needs to be policed for terrorists hiding among the innocent. Europe wasn't prepared for that and now the crime rate there has skyrocketed. Rapes in Sweden have most likely at least doubled (not every victim is willing to report), young girls are being groomed and raped in England (and the police are ignoring it, because they don't want to be identified as Islamophobes or in accordance with what's happening there even the police could be convicted by what is becoming Star Chamber justice), murderous terrorism and no-go areas are starting to multiply in Europe......All I can say is "Beware".
Trump campaigned on stereotypes, bigotry and divisiveness …
… mission accomplished.
Divisiveness? The last time America saw such divisiveness was the Civil War. Today it's neighbour vs neighbour, and not because of who the POTUS is, but it's caused by the widening differences in political ideology. I think it's just an excuse to blame the POTUS for it.
You're not here, Buzz … take it from a friend … you don't know … you don't encounter the propaganda campaigns, the orchestrated lying, the hypocrisy nor the subtle and overt hatred that is fed every day …
… and those hungry for the feeding because, in their "minds," it validates their ignorance and hatred and gives them cover.
Buzz is in the same bucket as Alan Dershowitz, and undoubtedly many others. They support Trump because he is all in for Israel. Every US president has supported Israel of course, but Trump's shenanigans, for example making an open advocate of unlimited settlements the US ambassador to Israel, have given Trump an elevated status among Israeli partisans.
You're right, A.Mac. It's much more difficult for me to be subjective in my opinions, because I'm not mired in " the propaganda campaigns, the orchestrated lying, the hypocrisy nor the subtle and overt hatred that is fed every day" in America.
Oh, man, y'all are still just pissed that Trump did what no other President has had the gonads to do--recognize Israel's capital AS THEIR CAPITAL.
I neither support Trump nor oppose him. I approve of his support of Israel because I consider it to be correct (and yes, I am proud to be supportive of Israel), and I disapprove of his fucking with NAFTA in a way that will negatively affect Canada, because that will be harmful to me personally due to the negative effect it can have on the Canadian dollar and its conversion rate here.
Perhaps if you had bothered to learn the actual legal right of Israel through the history of mandates, conferences and agreements (I believe I posted that for you previously from one source, and there are others, even posted by an NT member who had researched it properly) you would not see a problem with being pro-settlement. However, the fact that the leftist media and the UN (controlled by the Arab League) are so vastly biased against Israel it blinds the world of the truth.
President Trump is doing everything possible to keep entire families — parents and children — in areas of violence and danger rather than to offer haven to those who qualify as legitimate refugees. And now, he is even separating families as a punishment.
The overriding American priority should be admitting refugees from violence-stricken countries, and sooner rather than later — a lesson of the Holocaust that Trump is ignoring. Moreover, he is dismissing the importance of compassion, which as USCOM workers demonstrated should be at the core of refugee policy. Separation today is not necessary. Instead, simply following the policies enacted to avoid another Holocaust would allow families to remain together, safe from violence.
Maxi Weilheimer, after turning his sons over to USCOM workers in 1942, wrote, “So much of joy and of beauty has been destroyed by the hands of man, and the world which God created could be so lovely and so peaceful. We had a family life of rare happiness and contentment — unfortunately it was too short.” In 1941 and 1942, the United States was a haven for some refugee children fleeing persecution. Today, we are the ones causing unnecessary pain.
Last week, Reveal, a project of the Center for Investigative Reporting, identified 150 incidents of verbal harassment or physical violence over the past 18 months in which the perpetrator explicitly mentioned Donald Trump. Reveal ’s Will Carless wrote that “nearly every metric of intolerance in the U.S. has surged over [that time period], from reported anti-Semitism and Islamophobia to violent hate crimes based on skin color, nationality or sexual orientation.”
How ironic, some of the comments herein …
“nearly every metric of intolerance in the U.S. has surged over [that time period], from reported anti-Semitism and Islamophobia to violent hate crimes based on skin color, nationality or sexual orientation.”
How ironic.
Those who fail to see any comparisons between Nazi Germany and what' happening in the Trump era need to spend some time researching what led up to the Holocaust.
The neo-Nazis gathered in a safe house a few hours after the deadly “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last August. One of their chieftains, Robert “Azzmador” Ray, wanted to say a few words that evening, according to a description of the speech Ray posted online. As the man on the ground for the Daily Stormer, the biggest hate site in the U.S ., Ray had been in the middle of the action all day, leading his “Stormers” into battle. Now he wanted to read a fiery speech the site’s publisher, Andrew Anglin, had written for the occasion.
“My brothers,” Ray began, looking at his phone in the dark room. “A day is quickly coming when it is we who will be digging graves.” The neo-Nazis howled their approval. For them, the “Unite the Right” rally had always been more than a protest against the removal of a statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee. It was, as Ray and Anglin put it on the Daily Stormer, a “battle cry” for white nationalism.
“This is our war!” Ray yelled in the safe house. “This has always been our war. And I wouldn’t want it any other way. Death to traitors! Death to the enemies of the white race! Hail victory!”
WATCH THIS …
Don't tell me there's no comparison between one hateful regime and another! This is how it gets underway.
Why do some pull a Chicken Little over small stuff?
Why do some pull a Chicken Little over small stuff?
Small stuff?
Only the ignorant or the indoctrinated don't get it!
This isn't just about immigrants … it's about white nationalist/supremacist propaganda and the Great White Hope, "Jess Willard Trump" who plays successfully on the hatred and resentment of those who prefer scapegoats to reality!
There's nothing small or new in what Trump and his haters are part of.
No one's going to badger me … the hatred is palpable and the agenda is clear.
Shame on the apologists, deniers and enablers!
Is the video "small stuff" to you?
No, but then again, I am not stupid enough to equate a small band of thugs with the U.S. Government.
What brave little dickless ball-less cowards they are. Saying their hate from a safe house under cover of darkness. If you're so proud of your ignorance, show your faces.
What fucking cowards.
Comparing America to Nazi Germany is stupid, wrong, and misguided. Shows a REAL lack of empathy for what happened to Jews and others in Nazi Germany.
Actually the best comparison might be between Trump's Amerikkka and pre-WWII America when countless thousands of refugees died because the US turned them away at the door, as we did with the SS St Louis. The character of Amerikkka has dramatically worsened since then.
Well, I live in America. You can go live in your fantasy Amerikkka, but I'll stay here in reality, enjoying THIS country and all it has to offer.
Isn't Texas one of the confederate states which is still trying to pass anti-gay Jim Crow laws?
You are the Texas expert--you tell me.
tell me what laws passed in Texas discriminate against gays.
And what the FUCK does Texas have to with it anyways? Is THAT the fucking topic?
It just shows that very much like the Trump regime and pre-WWII Amerikka, Texas has no concern for basic civil rights.
LMFAO!!
You are a HOOT!
Is there some indoctrination classes y'all attend to get these little nuggets?
They are funny as HELL!
Don't tell me about real empathy for what happened to Jews in Nazi Germany; my father-in-law and his mother escaped the Nazis from Lodz, Poland … learn the history as to how the Nazis came to power and how the ignorant and deniers helped the Holocaust along.
Kiss off, bub.
Just because you may have had relatives affected by it doesn't give YOU any special insight.
Only fools would equate America with Nazi Germany.
Kiss off, bub.
Just because you may have had relatives affected by it doesn't give YOU any special insight.
Only fools would equate America with Nazi Germany.
The fool is the one who thinks that a holocaust only occurs on a grand scale with ghettos and gas chambers! When Neo-Nazis demonstrate and synagogues and black churches are targets of vandalism … and then the people in them … and the Hater-in-Chief stokes the hatred he knows just needs a prodding and his quasi-official approval … he emboldens the shithead who runs down an innocent women and kills her … after which his President tells us, that among his kind are some "fine people" …
… then YOU kiss off …
Reading the Classic Novel That Predicted Trump
The anxiety began well before the Cleveland convention, where the candidate of the “Forgotten Men,” the one who declared Americans “the greatest Race on the face of this old Earth,” seemed likely to clinch his party’s presidential nomination. Doremus Jessup, the protagonist of Sinclair Lewis’s 1935 novel “It Can’t Happen Here,” sees something dark and terrible brewing in American politics — the potential for “a real fascist dictatorship” led by the up-and-coming populist candidate Berzelius Windrip. Friends scoff at this extravagant concern. “That couldn’t happen here in America, not possibly!” they assure him. But Jessup, a small-town Vermont newspaper editor and a “mild, rather indolent and somewhat sentimental liberal,” worries about the devastation ahead. “What can I do?” he agonizes night after night. “Oh — write another editorial viewing-with-alarm, I suppose!”
okay, Chicken-Little-wanna-be.
Have it your way.
meanwhile, back on Earth...……………………………………………………………………….no Nazis in power to do a darn thing in the U.S. of A.
okay, Chicken-Little-wanna-be.
Have it your way.
meanwhile, back on Earth...……………………………………………………………………….no Nazis in power to do a darn thing in the U.S. of A.
My way?
US neo-Nazi groups on the rise under President Donald Trump: report
The number of hate groups in the US has risen during Trump's first year in office, according to a new report. Neo-Nazi groups in the US witnessed startling growth, increasing by 22 percent.
The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) on Wednesday published a report showing a rise in the number of hate groups operating in the United States during President Donald Trump's first year in office.
The number of hate groups in the US grew to 954, marking a 4-percent increase compared to last year. The report said Trump-inspired groups also provoked a backlash that witnessed a rise in black nationalist groups, such as the Nation of Islam.
Read more: White supremacy and neo-Nazis in the US: What you need to know
"President Trump's first year in office proved to be just as racially divisive as his campaign — but even more consequential," the report said. " President Trump in 2017 reflected what white supremacist groups want to see : a country where racism is sanctioned by the highest office, immigrants are given the boot and Muslims banned."
Neo-Nazis on the rise
There were more than 600 white supremacist groups in the US, according to the report. Neo-Nazi groups rose to 121 compared to 99 last year, marking a 22 percent increase.
yeah, okay, let's simply ignore the fact that they are STILL a very small minority in the US. They don't have enough votes to elect anyone to office, and the US Constitution bars most of what normal people would assume Neo-Nazis want.
You can stay all worried about crap that will never happen but I won't be a party to that nonsense.
Muslims weren't banned. That is a flat-out lie.
And you can spin it any old way you want, but NO WHERE in ANY of Trump's E.O.s did he even ATTEMPT to ban Muslims.
Even MY state doesn't ban Muslims---in fact, Texas has the largest Muslim population of all 50 states.
yeah--why don't you READ that order and then get back to me with a quote from it about banning Muslims--as you claimed.
Bet you can't or won't!
I read the WHOLE ORDER-----and it doesn't even MENTION Muslims!!!!!
Where in the world do y'all GET this stuff from?
I read the WHOLE ORDER-----and it doesn't even MENTION Muslims!!!!!
Where in the world do y'all GET this stuff from?
Don't talk down to me … particularly when you don't know what you're talking about!
Friday, January 27, 2017
President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order that banned foreign nationals from seven predominantly Muslim countries from visiting the country for 90 days, suspended entry to the country of all Syrian refugees indefinitely, and prohibited any other refugees from coming into the country for 120 days.
Saturday, January 28, 2017
As the Muslim ban went into effect on Saturday, lawyers from the ACLU-WA and the NW Immigrant Rights Project rushed to SeaTac Airport to help immigrants on incoming flights who were being denied entry to the U.S. The ACLU and NWIRP obtained a court order staying the deportation of two incoming travelers at SeaTac. With support from elected officials and more1,000 protesters, they secured the release of two people in the custody of Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
Sunday, January 29, 2017
A federal judge in New York granted the American Civil Liberties Union’s request for a nationwide temporary injunction blocking the deportation of all people stranded in U.S. airports under President Trump’s new Muslim ban.
Four other courts also weighed in, each one a defeat for President Trump. The ACLU is involved in four of the five cases.
Thursday, February 2, 2017
The ACLU-WA submitted a friend-of-the-court brief supporting the lawsuit filed in federal court by Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson on Jan. 30 seeking to have key provisions of the President’s Executive Order on immigration declared unconstitutional.
ACLU-WA Amicus Brief in Washington v. Trump
Thursday, February 2, 2017
The ACLU-WA joined ACLU affiliates in Montana and North Dakota to file a Freedom of Information (FOIA) request with the regional U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CPB) office to learn how Trump administration officials are interpreting and executing the president’s Muslim ban.
The filing is part of a coordinated effort from 50 ACLU affiliates, which filed 18 FOIAs with CBP field offices and its headquarters spanning over 55 international airports across the country.
ACLU national FOIA request
Friday, March 3, 2017
Federal Judge James Robart in Seattle issued an order temporarily blocking President Donald Trump’s Muslim ban executive order nationwide.
“This ruling is another stinging rejection of President Trump’s unconstitutional Muslim ban,” said Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project. “We will keep fighting to permanently dismantle this un-American executive order."
Temporary Restraining Order
Saturday, February 4, 2017
Department of Justice appealed Robart’s temporary restraining order of Muslim ban.
Tuesday, February 7, 2017
The ACLU-WA filed a class-action lawsuit in federal court in the Western District of Washington challenging President Trump’s ban on travel by people from seven Muslim-majority nations. The suit says the President’s Executive Order on immigration violates the Constitution as well as federal law.
The ACLU-WA is representing refugees and asylees who reside in Washington and have filed applications to reunify with their family members who have completed and cleared their final security screenings. Plaintiffs also include people who are Washington state residents here legally but who do not currently have a multiple entry visa. They are now trapped inside the country, unable to visit families in their home countries or carry out education-related travel for fear they will be unable to return to their lives here.
Also represented in the suit are two organizations: The Council on American-Islamic Relations-Washington (CAIR-WA), whose work has been greatly impacted by the Order’s violation of the First Amendment’s establishment of religion clause; and the Episcopal Diocese of Olympia, whose efforts to fulfill its religious mission of serving refugees have been severely harmed by the ban. The suit says the President’s Executive Order on immigration violates the Constitution as well as federal law.
Complaint in Does v Trump
Tuesday, February 7, 2017
ACLU sued Trump on behalf of organizations that resettle refugees , charging his Muslim ban violates First Amendment’s prohibition of government establishment of religion and the Fifth Amendment’s guarantees of equal treatment under the law.
Complaint in International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump
Thursday, February 9, 2017
Appeals court refused to reinstate Trump’s Muslim ban
ACLU-WA Legal Director Emily Chiang applauded the appeals court’s decision to leave in place the stay of the President’s Muslim travel ban.
“The unconstitutional ban violates American values and has taken a great toll on innocent individuals. It has ripped apart families in Washington state and around the country,” said Chiang. “Judicial review of actions by the executive branch is an essential part of our nation’s system to uphold the rule of law.”
Monday, March 6, 2017
Trump signs new Executive Order; ACLU vows to fight ‘Muslim Ban 2.0’
Trump’s new order exempts those who already have visas and green cards and removes Iraq from the banned countries, but it is still religious discrimination in the pretextual guise of national security, and is still unconstitutional, said ACLU Legal Director David Cole.
ACLU Blog Post: We'll See You In Court 2.0
Wednesday, March 15, 2017
District Court judge in Hawaii blocks Trump’s second Muslim ban before it takes effect.
Also on March 15, in U.S District Court in Maryland, the ACLU and partner District Court Order in Hawaii v. Trump
Thursday, March 16, 2017
A federal court in Maryland blocked the new Executive Order’s 90-day ban on immigration from six Muslim-majority countries . ABC News: Federal Court Blocks President Trump's New Travel Ban
Friday, March 17, 2017
The Trump administration appealed the preliminary injunction blocking the central provision of President Trump’s second Muslim ban executive order that was entered by a federal court in Maryland.
Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project and counsel for the plaintiffs in this case, had this reaction to the appeal: “President Trump’s Muslim ban has fared miserably in the courts, and for good reason — it violates fundamental provisions of our Constitution. We look forward to defending this careful and well-reasoned decision in the appeals court.”
Thursday, May 25, 2017
4th Circuit of Appeals, in a 10-3 ruling , upholds the lower court ruling in the MD case that stayed the Muslim ban nationwide.
Outcome of the case in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is still pending.
4th Circuit of Appeals Opinion in International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump
Tuesday, June 27, 2017
The U.S. Supreme Court in late June agreed to hear a challenge to the Muslim travel ban and is allowing the government to move forward with a narrowed portion of the ban. The Court’s ruling forbids the government from applying either the 90-day ban on nationals of six countries or the 120-day ban on refugees to any individual who can credibly claim a “bona fide relationship” with a person or entity in the U.S. The ACLU is very concerned that the Trump administration appears to be using an arbitrary limited definition of these relationships that will cruelly and needlessly keep family members apart.
Wednesday, July 19, 2017
The Supreme Court left in place a lower-court order exempting grandparents, grandchildren, brothers-in-law, sisters-in-law, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews and cousins of people in the United States from the Muslim ban. However, it also issued an order that allows refugees with formal assurances from resettlement organizations to be banned unless they have other ties to people or entities in the United States, pending further proceedings.
In the fall, the Supreme Court will hear arguments by the ACLU and partner organizations challenging the Trump’s Muslim ban.
Supreme Court Issues Mixed Order On Muslim Ban Implementation
Sunday, September 24, 2017
President Trump signed the third version of his Muslim ban. Like the previous versions, the new ban blocks travel to the United States from six predominantly Muslim countries and now also includes North Koreans and certain Venezuelan government officials.
These additions do not change the fact that this third version remains a Muslim ban. North Korea accounted for just 61 affected visas last year — out of more than 75 million visitors to the United States. And Venezuela as a country is not banned in any meaningful sense. Only certain Venezuelan government officials and their families are affected, and those individuals are only barred from obtaining tourist and temporary business visas. In contrast, nearly every single person from the Muslim-majority countries is barred from getting a green card, no matter what family, business, or other U.S. connections he or she has.
Trump’s third Muslim ban came about two weeks before the case involving the second version of the ban was to be argued before the Supreme Court. This action led the Court to cancel oral arguments on the earlier version so that the parties could address whether the new order renders the Trump administration’s appeal moot.
The ACLU filed a letter to the Supreme Court saying the case isn’t moot and asking the court to re-set oral arguments in it.
Monday, October 16, 2017
The American Civil Liberties Union and partner organizations were in federal court in Maryland seeking to halt the ban.
Follow the case
Tuesday, October 17, 2017
A federal court temporarily blocked President Trump’s newest Muslim ban in a ruling in a case brought by the state of Hawaii.
Read our statement on the order
Monday, November 6, 2017
The ACLU of Washington filed a motion in federal court seeking a Preliminary Injunction on behalf of Plaintiff Joseph Doe, a refugee living in Washington state who wants to be reunited with his wife and children, and all others in Washington in similar situations. It challenges the administration’s latest Muslim Travel Ban restrictions, which will indefinitely prevent children and spouses from being allowed to join refugees already admitted to the U.S.
Doe et al. v. Trump
Monday, December 4, 2017
The Supreme Court granted the Trump administration’s request to temporarily allow the latest Muslim ban to take full effect as the case is litigated. Two federal appeals courts will soon hear separate challenges to the ban. The Ninth Circuit will hear Hawaii’s case on Dec. 6, and the Fourth Circuit will hear the challenge brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and partner organizations on Dec. 8.
Friday, December 22, 2017
Ninth Circuit upholds block on Muslim ban, but Supreme Court lets ban go into effect while it reviews
The Ninth Circuit upholds lower court's ruling blocking Muslim Ban 3.0. However, due to the Supreme Court's order on Dec. 4, the ban remains in effect while the cases are being litigated before the Supreme Court.
This means the Muslim Ban 3.0 and the refugee ban are still in full effect.
Saturday, December 23, 2017
Federal Court blocks refugee ban
A federal District Court granted an injunction to stop the Trump Administration from separating refugees and their families.
“I am very happy that the judge recognized my right to have my family join me here in the United States, and I hope that they can come here as soon as possible,” said plaintiff Joseph Doe.
The judge’s order in the case Doe v. Trump enjoins the Trump Administration from enforcing a policy which would indefinitely prevent children and spouses of refugees from any country from being reunited with their refugee family members already admitted to the U.S.
Tuesday, January 9, 2018
Court rejects Government’s request to stay injunction against Trump’s refugee ban
The U.S. District Court in Seattle today denied a government motion to stay a nationwide preliminary injunction the Court issued on Dec. 24, 2017, against a Trump Administration policy that indefinitely barred certain refugees and family members of refugees from entering the U.S.
The action came in the case Doe v. Trump, which the ACLU filed on February 7, 2017.
Thursday, January 18, 2018
Joseph Doe and his family reunited after court rejects Trump’s refugee ban
Refugee Joseph Doe, plaintiff in, Doe v. Trump, an ACLU-WA suit challenging the Trump administration’s Muslim Ban, was finally able to hug his wife and three children Jan. 18, ending four years of painful separation. The family was reunited at SeaTac airport after a federal court in December granted a nationwide injunction against a ban that would have indefinitely prevented children and spouses from any country from joining refugees like Doe, who have already been admitted to the U.S.
“I am overjoyed to see my wife and children and to be together as a family again,” said Doe. “I am so grateful that the judge recognized my right to have my family join me here in the United States.”
Read the case files in Doe et al. v. Trump
Friday, January 19, 2018
Muslim Ban to go to Supreme Court
The U.S. Supreme Court announces that it will hear challenges to Muslim Ban 3.0. Oral arguments are scheduled for Spring 2018.
Thursday, February 15, 2018
Second Circuit Court upholds block on Muslim Ban
The Fourth Circuit upholds lower court’s ruling blocking Muslim Ban 3.0. However, due to the Supreme Court's order on Dec. 4, the ban remains in full effect as the Supreme Court considers the challenges.
Thursday, March 29, 2018
Court rejects government’s attempt to get ACLU-WA case thrown out
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the Administration’s attempt to get rid of Doe v. Trump, and remanded it to U.S. District Court to decide whether the case is moot.
Wednesday, April 25, 2018
The Supreme Court hears arguments on Trump’s Muslim Ban 3.0
In December, the Supreme Court allowed the third and latest version of the ban to go into effect until the legal challenges to it are fully decided. Today, the Supreme Court hears oral arguments in a challenge to the ban, Hawaii v. Trump.
The ACLU has been counsel in successful challenges to all three versions of the ban, including one now pending before the Supreme Court.
____________________________________________________________
What is most frightening are the declarations of ignorance by those who either don't know the realities … or … don't want to know the realities … or who think no one knows the realities.
I asked for evidence that it is a Muslim ban, and for you to point out WHERE it banned Muslims--or even MENTIONED them--and you serve up THAT twaddle?
LMFAO!
I asked for evidence that it is a Muslim ban, and for you to point out WHERE it banned Muslims--or even MENTIONED them--and you serve up THAT twaddle?
LMFAO!
Saturday, January 28, 2017
As the Muslim ban went into effect on Saturday, lawyers from the ACLU-WA and the NW Immigrant Rights Project rushed to SeaTac Airport to help immigrants on incoming flights who were being denied entry to the U.S. The ACLU and NWIRP obtained a court order staying the deportation of two incoming travelers at SeaTac. With support from elected officials and more1,000 protesters, they secured the release of two people in the custody of Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
Friday, March 3, 2017
Federal Judge James Robart in Seattle issued an order temporarily blocking President Donald Trump’s Muslim ban executive order nationwide.
Friday, January 19, 2018
Muslim Ban to go to Supreme Court
The U.S. Supreme Court announces that it will hear challenges to Muslim Ban 3.0. Oral arguments are scheduled for Spring 2018.
Thursday, February 15, 2018
Second Circuit Court upholds block on Muslim Ban
The Fourth Circuit upholds lower court’s ruling blocking Muslim Ban 3.0. However, due to the Supreme Court's order on Dec. 4, the ban remains in full effect as the Supreme Court considers the challenges.
And all of the other such references in what I posted …
______________________________
When I take the time and give you the respect of a direct, specific answer, and you come back with a troll's response, I request that you troll elsewhere.
I asked you specific questions.
Please, once again, point out WHERE in the EO it states Muslims are banned, as you claim.
Barring that, it is NOT a Muslim ban. If you are going to insist on calling it one, please at LEAST be able to show where Muslims have been banned.
I am sorry you feel I am trolling because I asked for proof of something YOU claimed. I figured you would be able to prove what you write.
Obviously, my mistake, thinking your opinion was based on facts.
Who in their right minds would consider something a ban when it does NOT ban Muslims? When it doesn't even MENTION Muslims?
Saturday, January 28, 2017
As the Muslim ban went into effect on Saturday, lawyers from the ACLU-WA and the NW Immigrant Rights Project rushed to SeaTac Airport to help immigrants on incoming flights who were being denied entry to the U.S. The ACLU and NWIRP obtained a court order staying the deportation of two incoming travelers at SeaTac. With support from elected officials and more1,000 protesters, they secured the release of two people in the custody of Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
hey, I GET it already.
You want to call it a Muslim ban when it isn't one.
Even you can't find ONE word about Muslims in the supposed Muslim ban!
You can cite court cases until the cows come home, but what you are doing is merely using other people's word--people who can no more prove it I a Muslim ban than YOU can.
And why do you keep quoting me that crap when what I asked for was very specific and germane?
You actually think you gave a direct and definitive response. As was posed to you, show where the Executive Order makes any such statement, not someone’s biased opinion.
over 90% of the world’s Muslims are not included in this order
most importantly NO Foreigner has a Constitutional right to come to this country. Regardless of what anti American leftist judges say, the US is allowed under the Constitution to limit who it will allow to immigrate and/or visit this country. That is the right of any sovereign nation
When the SCOTUS takes a case regarding a "Muslim Ban," you can call it what you want … it does not change the intent of the order.
WASHINGTON — A 15-month legal battle over President Trump’s efforts to impose a ban on travel to the United States from several predominantly Muslim countries reached a final stage on Wednesday at the Supreme Court, with its five-member conservative majority signaling it was ready to approve a revised version of the president’s plan.
The justices appeared ready to discount Mr. Trump’s campaign promises to impose what he repeatedly described as a “Muslim ban,” while giving him the benefit of the doubt traditionally afforded to presidents. Some expressed worry about second-guessing executive branch determinations about who should be allowed to enter the United States.
most importantly NO Foreigner has a Constitutional right to come to this country
There are two legal options … Asylum and Temporary Protected Status.
over 90% of the world’s Muslims are not included in this order
Assuming for the sake of this discussion that the number is correct …
… That would mean that 10% are included, wouldn't it? … Muslims … banned.
(iv) Executive Order 13769 did not provide a basis for discriminating for or against members of any particular religion. While that order allowed for prioritization of refugee claims from members of persecuted religious minority groups, that priority applied to refugees from every nation, including those in which Islam is a minority religion, and it applied to minority sects within a religion.
___________________________________________
The priority is centered around Islam … a particular religion.
Muslim is not a word in the EO.
And no matter how hard you spin it, and what court cases and reporting you cite, it is CLEARLY not Muslim ban.
What part of this aren't you getting?
The order said nothing about Muslims.
The mere fact that some countries were put on the list have Muslims in them isn't the reason the countries were included in the ban. My God, if that were the case, don't you think that EVERY country with Muslims in it would be banned?
Last response to you … this after I have responded specifically and regularly to your questions.
How typically Trumpian that COURT CASES and LAWS mean nothing if they do not suit an authoritarian agenda.
And, I too have asked questions in this thread … and they are evaded and deluged with a gang bang deflection effort.
Why bother to stipulate Islam in the EO if it's not an attempt to ban Muslims? Why not stipulate refugees in nations where Christianity or Hindu or Buddhist religions are in the minority?
Why only name "Islam"?
1. Nowhere in the government legal documents either of the Executive branch or SCOTUS are those words to be found. They are only found in the OPINION of the leftist courts and the media
2. Asylum and temporary protected status are not Constitutional guarantees. Our government can change or eliminate these at its discretion including the president who was given that authority by Congress
3. Reductio ad absurdism
I support banning from immigration anyone who believes and follows the Quran as they are indicating their support to conquer, enslave, or kill all non Muslims as ordered by the Quran
Specifically?
That is freaking hilarious!
I asked something SPECIFIC--something you have carefully and artfully AVOIDED.
here it is yet AGAIN:
Please point out where in the EO it bans Muslims or even mentions them.
How hard can that be????????????????????????
Or is it just hard because it isn't TRUE?
Ah no. Illegal aliens and criminal aliens are given the boot .
No Muslims were never banned .
Saturday, January 28, 2017
As the Muslim ban went into effect on Saturday, lawyers from the ACLU-WA and the NW Immigrant Rights Project rushed to SeaTac Airport to help immigrants on incoming flights who were being denied entry to the U.S. The ACLU and NWIRP obtained a court order staying the deportation of two incoming travelers at SeaTac. With support from elected officials and more1,000 protesters, they secured the release of two people in the custody of Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
Just because the aclu claims simething does not make it true .
And just because you say something is "fake news" or false doesn't make it false.
NOTE: I want to be able to respond to comments … so, I will LOCK the discussion shortly and reopen it tomorrow in mid-morning.
WE ARE REOPENED FOR BUSINESS
Several things …
The Discussion Headline Asks a Question … namely …
"What Manner Of Government Administration Calls To Its Depraved Hateful Base Via Inhumane Acts?"
• Going forward in this thread, instead of attacking the question for its being asked … address it or risk being cited as "OFF-TOPIC"
• Cease and desist the pronouncement and personal attacks on participants in the discussion
__________________________________________________________
Given the pair of statements below, what if Trump (or, any POTUS) decides to deport "groups" of individuals who have not violated any laws, but, which are part of a demographic as identified and singled out by Trump (Spencer, Bannon, Gorka, Arpaio, Miller, etc.)?
Please don't equivocate or move the goalposts … let's have an actual discussion/debate.
POLITICS
Giuliani: "Trump Could Have Shot Comey And Still Couldn’t Be Indicted For It"
Trump: 'I have the absolute right to PARDON myself'
This article makes me think of a comment I read by one of our left leaning members.
Sen. Merkley refused entry into facility holding hundreds of children separated from parents.
Why is that?
What right does he have to enter secure facilities?
Which has nothing to do at all about some Senator or Congressman entering secure facilities.
but good spin as always!
Yeah, but some people will continue to make a mountain out of a molehill.
Like a Senator is going to be handed over sensitive, classified info because he asked for it while at a facility!
In the words of the Great Equivocator, Trump … "We'll see what happens."
The thread has become a dismissive pissing contest.
LAST CALL FOR LAST WORDS … don't make them personal and they will stand.
Closing up at 4:15 PM or thereabouts …