Since the start of this election cycle, the liberals, or progressives, or whatever on earth they’re calling themselves now, have appeared to be in a perpetual state of anger or rage over Donald Trump. From his candidacy announcement to his first rally, from his first debate to his winning of the Republican nomination, and from his election to the presidency to his inauguration, the liberals have been outraged. Even now, the progressives are pitching a fit, and those in Congress are projecting their anger toward his nominees for the Cabinet. Trump’s, Cabinet nominations are met with vitriol, delaying tactics and personal attacks, including name calling. Trump’s nominees are called racist, sexist, xenophobes, homophobes, elitists, and inexperienced.
While congressional liberals continue to vent their anger on Trump’s cabinet picks, the majority of them have focused their rage on some of President Trump’s executive orders and memoranda. First, it was his executive order to begin repealing the ACA, (Affordable Care Act), “Obamacare;” then it was his presidential memorandum enacting a federal employee hiring freeze, and the memorandum barring international, nongovernmental organizations that perform or promote abortions from receiving US government funding. Next, it was the executive order allowing construction of a border wall and tougher immigration enforcement; as well as the memoranda permitting the construction of the Dakota Access and Keystone XL Pipelines. Can you imagine the effort it must take to wake-up every morning — angry. I digress.
Currently, the left is having a conniption over the executive order which suspends general and refugee immigration for a short period of time from seven, predominately Islamic, countries, that the media has labeled inappropriately and inaccurately, as the “Muslim ban.” They are staging protests, and marches. They are holding signs offering legal assistance and of protest that read, “Impeach Trump,” “No ban, No wall,” and the like all while shouting such phrases as, “Let them in,” and “No Trump, No KKK, No fascist USA.”
Unfortunately, many of those opposed to the order are either clueless, misinformed, or have an ulterior motive. For instance, EO 13769 does not ban Muslim immigration; if it was a Muslim ban why was 85% of the Muslim population not included in the ban? No, EO 13769 just suspends immigration from the seven, Muslim, nations including, Libya, Yemen, and Somalia, for 90 days, and all refugee immigration, including that from Muslim countries for 120 days, pending a review of vetting procedures. Incidentally, the words Muslim or Islam are found nowhere within EO 13769. To say Trump’s executive order bans Muslims is nothing short of obfuscation. The banned countries are either combating or controlled by Islamic extremists. Amidst such chaos, how can the U.S. trust the profiles of such immigrants entering our country?
Those opposed to EO 13769 also claim it is unconstitutional; because it either exceeds executive authority or forces refugees to pass an illegal, religions test, immoral, unjustified, and un-American. First of all, it is not unconstitutional because it neither exceeds executive authority nor does it add an illegal test, despite the rulings by several judges. In 1952, Congress granted the president sole discretion over alien (non-citizen), entry into the United States. The statute reads,
“Whenever the President finds the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate…” (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182)
This means, that the President may permit or deny, any individual or group, entrance into the United States, as he sees fit, with a simple proclamation such as, an executive order.
The law was written in response to a 1948, Supreme Court decision in Chicago and Southern Airlines v. Waterman. In the case, the Supreme Court determined that foreign policy, including alien threats to national security, are political, and not judicial, by nature. For the majority opinion, Justice Robert H. Jackson wrote,
“Such decisions are wholly confided by our Constitution to the political departments of the government, Executive and Legislative. They are delicate, complex, and involve large elements of prophecy. They are and should be undertaken only by those directly responsible to the people whose welfare they advance or imperil. They are decisions of a kind for which the Judiciary has neither aptitude, facilities nor responsibility and which has long been held to belong in the domain of political power not subject to judicial intrusion or inquiry.” (https://casetext.com/case/c-s-air-lines-v-waterman-corp)
Translation: The President has and always has had the sole authority to regulate general and refugee immigration and neither the Congress nor the Supreme Court may interfere. As far as EO 13769 being unconstitutional for adding an illegal test of religion to refugee requirements is ridiculous. Ridiculous because a religion test is already a part of U.S. immigration law. According to federal and refugee law a refugee is,
“(A) any person who is outside any country of such person’s nationality…and who is unable or unwilling to return to…that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion…” (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1101)
President Trump’s executive order is not only constitutional, it’s been the law of the land for 65 years! As for EO 13769 being immoral, unjustified, and un-American, that will be explored in the second part of this blog post.