A Filipino Muslim activist has been denied entry into the United States and is believed to be held at San Francisco International Airport, a human rights group in the Philippines reported. The Sandugo-Movement of Moro and Indigenous Peoples for Self-Determination, a group based in Mindanao, said Jerome Aladdin Succor Aba has been in the airport's holding facility since his arrival on April 17. It was believed that Aba, chairman of the group Suara Bangsamoro, was detained by American immigration officials over "visa problems." The activist was supposed to speak before religious and U.S. government officials, including members of the U.S. Senate and the House of Representatives. Aba was also scheduled to speak on the human rights situation in the Philippines at the National Ecumenical Advocacy Days for Global Peace with Justice in Washington D.C. on April 20-23.
When protests and widespread confusion broke out at airports across the U.S. after President Donald Trump issued his first travel ban executive order last January, White House officials scoffed at the scenes of turmoil and insisted the president’s plan was smoothly moving into place. “It really is a massive success story in terms of implementation on every single level,” a senior administration official told reporters two days after Trump signed the directive. Top Trump adviser Stephen Miller boasted to CBS that the roll-out was “efficient, orderly [and] enormously successful.” However, Department of Homeland Security records obtained by POLITICO reflect confusion on the front lines about how to implement the order and show that DHS officials deemed the situation a “crisis” requiring a high-level response.
By the Center for Constitutional Rights. Washington, DC - This past Wednesday, October 18, over 3,000 people from all over the country convened in Washington, DC, for the national #NoMuslimBanEver mobilization. Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) staff members joined the march from the White House to the Trump International Hotel. The #NoMuslimBanEver campaign was a grassroots awareness and mobilization campaign that happened during the weeks leading up to Wednesday, October 18, the day that the third iteration of Trump's Muslim Ban was slated to take effect.
By Rob Hunter for The Guardian, The US supreme court announced on Monday that it will decide on the legality of Donald Trump’s travel ban. It also partially stayed injunctions against the ban, meaning that the administration can impose 90-day bans on people traveling from six Muslim-majority countries (unless they have a “bona fide relationship” with someone in the US), and that it can bar refugees from entering the US for up to 120 days. It’s likely that the court will eventually uphold all or part of the ban as an appropriate exercise of the president’s powers. Only mass confrontational politics can prevent that from happening, or undo it if it does happen. It was direct action, not legal argument, that stopped the administration from implementing the travel ban in its entirety earlier this year. The original ban quickly faced stiff protest in January. Rapid mass mobilization, combined with the organizing skills of activists and immigration advocates, produced the thrilling spectacle of large-scale direct action in some of the most heavily policed spaces in the country: airports. Federal judges responded to the pressure by issuing orders blocking removals under the ban, and later preventing enforcement of the ban’s provisions. Injunctions were also later issued against a revised ban that was reworded to be less transparently Islamophobic.
By Cristian Farias for The Huffington Post - President Donald Trump couldn’t appease the appeals court that first rebuked him over his travel ban, as a panel of judges dealt him yet another legal setback Monday despite administration efforts to help the ban survive judicial scrutiny. More than three months since the president went back to the drawing board on his original executive order, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit again refused to reinstate the revised version, which aimed to impose a ban on travel from six Muslim-majority countries and a suspension of the refugee resettlement program. “The Immigration and Nationality Act ... gives the President broad powers to control the entry of aliens, and to take actions to protect the American public. But immigration, even for the President, is not a one-person show,” said the court in a unanimous, unsigned ruling. “The President’s authority is subject to certain statutory and constitutional restraints. We conclude that the President, in issuing the Executive Order, exceeded the scope of the authority delegated to him by Congress,” the court added.
By Bethan McKernan for Independent - Iran, one of the states targeted by Donald Trump’s Muslim ban, is a country from which the US could learn a lot on the resettlement of refugees, the UN has said. The Soviet War in Afghanistan displaced six million people to neighbouring Iran and Pakistan in 1979. Almost four decades later, the Tehran government still shelters around one million registered Afghans, and up to two million are thought to also be living in the country - making Iran home to the world’s fourth largest refugee population. “The leadership demonstrated by the Iranian government has been exemplary in hosting refugees and keeping borders open,” Sivanka Dhanapala, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees in Tehran, said on Wednesday.
By Todd Richmond for Associated Press - MADISON, Wis. (AP) — A federal judge on Friday blocked President Donald Trump's administration from enforcing his new travel ban against a Syrian family looking to escape their war-torn homeland by fleeing to Wisconsin. The ruling likely is the first by a judge since Trump issued a revised travel ban on Monday, according to a spokesman for the Washington state attorney general, who has led states challenging the ban. A Syrian Muslim man who was granted asylum and settled in Wisconsin has been working since last year to win U.S. government approval for his wife and 3-year-old daughter to leave the devastated city of Aleppo and join him here...
by Chip Gibbons for BORDC - On Monday March 6, 2017, the Trump Administration announced its second attempt at a Muslim Ban. While it is impossible to justify a ban that is fundamentally rooted in animus towards Muslims, Trump tried to rectify his previous executive order’s most glaring problems. For example, the new ban will not apply to legal permanent residents or people who currently hold valid visas. The constitutional issues are much deeper than that. Ruling against the first ban, federal courts failed to find a rational relationship between barring the entry of individuals from the countries listed and a national security purpose.
By Juan Gastelum for NILC - LOS ANGELES — President Donald Trump today signed a new executive order banning entry to the U.S. of individuals from six Muslim-majority countries and of all refugees. The order is meant to supplant a previous directive issued in January that remains blocked after several courts found it was unlikely to stand up to constitutional muster. That order barred entry from seven Muslim-majority countries and also halted resettlement in the U.S. of any new refugees. Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center, issued the following statement: “Throughout the presidential campaign and even after the signing of the previous executive order banning Muslims and refugees...
By David Cole for Just Security - If a Muslim Ban is cleaned up to exclude Iraq, exempt lawful permanent residents and other current visa holders, is it still a Muslim ban? That’s the question presented by President Donald Trump’s decision to replace his original executive order, enjoined by the courts, with a new one. The administration’s decision to abandon the old order is wise; every judge but one who had reviewed it found it raised grave constitutional concerns. The new order will be less catastrophic in its roll-out than the first, both because it exempts those who already have visas and because it will not go into effect until March 16. But it’s still religious discrimination in the pre-textual guise of national security.
By Glen Ford for Black Agenda Report - In the most dramatic expression of insider opposition to a sitting administration’s policies in generations, over 1,000 U.S. State Department employees signed on to a memo protesting President Donald Trump’s temporary ban on people from seven predominantly Muslim countries setting foot on U.S. soil. Another recent high point in dissent among the State Department’s 18,000 worldwide employees occurred in June of last year, when 51 diplomats called for U.S. air strikes against the Syrian government of President Bashar al Assad. Neither outburst of dissent was directed against the U.S. wars and economic sanctions that have killed and displaced millions of people in the affected countries
By Sam Sacks for The District Sentinel - An executive order signed by President Donald Trump last Friday that has sparked protests around the country has now created unrest within the US State Department. Career Foreign Service officers at the department submitted a memo through an official channel raising their objections to the administration’s decision to ban travelers, including refugees, from seven majority-Muslim nations from entering the United States. “This ban stands in opposition to the core American and constitutional values that we, as federal employees, took an oath to uphold,” the diplomats wrote.
By Candice Bernd for Truthout - "It's not a Muslim ban, but we were totally prepared," President Trump told reporters in the Oval Office over the weekend about his executive order barring foreign citizens, including refugees, from seven predominantly Muslim countries from entering the US while giving Christians from those countries preferential treatment. "You see it at the airports, you see it all over. It's working out very nicely." But with travel for many disrupted over the weekend -- as documented permanent US residents holding authorized green cards and others holding approved visas were barred from boarding flights abroad, and with between 100 to 200 travelers finding themselves detained for hours at US airports -- the exact opposite was true.
By Staff of Tele Sur - Not letting up on protesting and showing solidarity with those banned, thousands took to the streets again Sunday to protest Trump's new policy. Protests erupted for a second day in several U.S. cities Sunday as people took to the streets against President Donald Trump's executive order banning citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States, even those with valid visas and permanent residency. Thousands of people gathered in Lower Manhattan in New York protesting Trump’s “Muslim ban” and his earlier decree ordering the construction of a wall along the border with Mexico.