White House defends ban
Trump collision course with attorneys-general, big business, rights groups heads for Supreme Court
THE US government defended President Donald Trump’s travel ban as a “lawful exercise” of his authority, and urged an appeals court to reinstate the suspended measure in the interests of national security.
Three days after a federal judge put the controversial measure on hold, Justice Department lawyers filed a court brief challenging the nationwide injunction as “vastly overbroad”.
An hour-long telephone hearing had been set for late yesterday in a highstakes case that looks increasingly likely to be settled by the Supreme Court.
And, on Monday, Trump fired off on Twitter: “The threat from radical Islamic terrorism is very real, just look at what is happening in Europe and the Middle-East. Courts must act fast!”
Earlier in the day, during a visit to US Central Command in Tampa, Florida, Trump accused the media of downplaying the terror threat that his administration cites to justify its ban, saying they purposefully ignored jihadist atrocities.
Although he failed to provide evidence of a conspiracy by the media, the White House later distributed a list of 78 attacks it said were executed or inspired by the Islamic State group, saying most had failed to receive adequate media coverage.
However, the claims ignore a large amount of reporting on these attacks by the jihadist group and its sympathisers in Western countries.
Trump’s decree summarily denied entry to all refugees for 120 days, and travellers from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days – a move critics charge will damage US interests.
Refugees from Syria were blocked indefinitely. The president says the ban is needed to tighten US security against foreign terror threats, citing the September 11 2001 attacks despite the hijackers having no links to the named countries.
In its filing to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, the government argued that the federal court that temporarily rolled back Trump’s directive had “erred in entering an injunction barring enforcement of the order”, asking that the ban be reinstated.
The Justice Department argued that “the executive order is a lawful exercise of the president’s authority over the entry of aliens into the United States and the admission of refugees”.
The government again denied that the order specifically targets Muslims, defending it as a means of reviewing and revising screening procedures in order to “protect against terrorist attacks”.
Friday’s decision by a federal judge in Seattle has allowed the many travellers who were suddenly barred from US soil to start trickling back in.
On Sunday, the appellate court refused to overrule the federal judge.
Attorneys-general for the states of Washington and Minnesota, which won the temporary stay of the ban, have asked the appeals court to refuse to reinstate it.
They were backed on Monday in a court brief filed by attorneys-general from 16 other US states. Several legal and rights groups have filed in support of the states, including the Southern Poverty Law Centre, Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the American Civil Liberties Union.
And in an additional blow, a slew of Silicon Valley giants led by Apple, Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Twitter have filed a brief in support of the lawsuit, arguing that the ban threatens their ability to attract crucial foreign talent and investment to the United States.
Tesla and SpaceX were among another 30 companies that added their names to the filing late Monday, pushing the total to more than 120. A group of prominent Democrats including former secretaries of state John Kerry and Madeleine Albright also added their voices to the criticism, arguing that Trump’s ban could endanger US troops in the field, disrupt counterterrorism cooperation and feed Islamic State group propaganda.
White House spokesman Sean Spicer insisted the administration was “absolute- ly not” planning to back down on its plan for extreme vetting at US borders, saying “once we win the case, it will go right back into action.” — AFP