The Stoppage of President Trump's Immigration Order
By: Bill O'ReillyFebruary 9, 2017
Archive
Comment
Email
Print
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

So let's cut through all the mumbo-jumbo and political hackery.

Here's what is really happening.

The Trump administration believes that terrorists in nations with no central control can get to the USA in a way that is dangerous.

Hypothetically, an ISIS killer could board a plane in Tripoli, Libya with a fake passport then fly to Paris change planes and fly on to New York City.

Nobody in Libya will vet that man, so he would arrive here with a decent chance of entry.

Therefore the president wants to impose stronger security oversight on nations like Libya and six others that are essentially in chaos.

Federal law seems to favor the president:

Section 212 states:

"Whenever the President finds that 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 ..."

The law seems clear.

So Mr. Trump suspended immigration in seven countries for 90 days; for Syria he also stopped refugees from entering until further notice.

Enter the states of Minnesota and Washington, where the attorney's general challenged the travel ban, saying it harmed individuals and businesses and was unconstitutional because it targeted Muslims.

A federal judge in Washington then blocked President Trump's order, and just two hours ago a federal appeals court upheld the block unanimously.

Why?

The three appeals court judges basically ruled that there is no urgency to stop travel from the seven countries, and that there are strong arguments on both sides that should be reviewed.

The judges also wrote that no irreparable injury would be caused by a stay of the president's order, and that the courts should eventually decide whether the order is constitutional.

The judges basically saying more legal vetting is needed of the terrorist vetting plan.

Talking Points believes there is more than a little political motivation in his case.

No question Minnesota and Washington State took the action because of liberal politics.  They believe the president is anti-Muslim.

As for the appeals court, it's impossible to say with certainty what motivated their decision.

If you take them at their word they want more legal hearings on the matter.

President Trump says the decision to block is purely political and that his Justice Department will take it to the Supreme Court.

I say good.  Let's see if federal law which again is clear in this case means anything anymore.

In the meantime, anyone coming here from the seven nations cited can expect a substantial wait at the airport.

And that's the memo.