TRAVEL BAN:
The White House is pursuing options to reinstate President Trump’s travel ban on refugees and on travelers from seven majority-Muslim countries, fighting what on aide called “judicial usurpation.”
The White House is pursuing several options to reinstate President Donald Trump’s travel ban on all refugees and travelers from seven majority-Muslim nations, fighting back against what one top adviser on Sunday called “judicial usurpation” of power.
White House senior policy adviser Stephen Miller, the author of the executive order, said the administration was simultaneously weighing several legal options after the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously Thursday against reinstating the travel ban, which had been blocked temporarily by a federal judge in Washington state.
Miller said officials are considering appealing with the 9th Circuit and having an emergency hearing “en banc,” or before all judges on the court; seeking an emergency stay at the Supreme Court; taking the case to trial at the district level; or writing a new executive order for Trump to sign that would withstand legal scrutiny.
In unusually combative interviews on the Sunday morning television shows, Miller also refused to say whether Trump still has con- fidence in his national security adviser, retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, amid controversy over his communications with Russian officials. Miller also advanced false claims that widespread voter fraud undermined Trump’s performance in November’s election.
Miller insisted that Trump has the constitutional authority to ban the entry of certain foreigners, saying the actions represent “the very apex of presidential authority.”
“I want to say something very clearly, and this is going to be very disappointing to the people protesting the president and the people in Congress, like (Senate Minority Leader Chuck) Schumer, who have attacked the president for his lawful and necessary action: The president’s powers here are beyond question,” Miller said on Fox News.
“This is a judicial usurpation of the power. It is a violation of judges’ proper roles in litigating disputes. We will fight it,” Miller said.
The 9th Circuit ruling represented a significant setback for Trump. The decision brushed aside arguments by the Justice Department that the president has the constitutional power to restrict entry to the United States and that the courts cannot second-guess his determination that such a step was needed to prevent terrorism.
Schumer tweeted last week that Trump “ought to see the writing on the wall” and abandon the proposal.
Trump has said expects to win the legal battle over his original directive, even though other options are being considered by the White House. He has cast the order as crucial for national security.
Appearing also on ABC News, Miller said: “A district judge in Seattle cannot force the president of the United States to change our laws and our Constitution because of their own personal views. The president has the power ... to suspend the entry of aliens when it’s in the national interest.”
Miller said on CBS News that the judiciary was acting like “a supreme branch of government.”
“One unelected judge in Seattle cannot make laws for the entire country,” Miller told anchor John Dickerson. “I mean, this is just crazy, John. The idea that you’re going to have a judge in Seattle say that a foreign national living in Libya has an effective right to enter the United States is beyond anything we’ve ever seen before.”
U.S. District Judge James Robart in Seattle issued the temporary restraining order halting the ban after Washington state and Minnesota sued. The Trump administration has said the seven nations — Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen — have raised terrorism concerns. The states have argued that the executive order unconstitutionally blocked entry based on religion and the travel ban harmed individuals, businesses and universities.
On Sunday Miller also suggested the legal debate was not over the constitutionality of Trump’s action, but rather over ideology.
“There is no constitutional right for a citizen in a foreign country, who has no status in America, to demand entry into our country,” Miller said on ABC. “Such a right cannot exist. Such a right will never exist. This is an ideological disagreement between those who believe we should have borders and should have controls and those who believe there should be no borders and no controls.”
Miller’s exchanges with the Sunday show hosts were testy on other subjects as well. He punted when ABC anchor George Stephanopoulos asked him about The Washington Post’s report that Flynn discussed the then- Obama administration’s sanctions against Russia in conversations with that country’s ambassador before Flynn was sworn in as White House national security adviser.
“I don’t have any news to make you today on this point,” Miller said, prompting Stephanopoulos to ask, “Then why are you coming in if you can’t answer the questions being posed about the White House?”
On NBC, when anchor Chuck Todd asked Miller whether Trump still had confidence in Flynn, Miller said he did not know. Miller said his colleagues in the White House “did not give me anything to say.”
Miller’s combative appearances pleased his boss, who apparently was watching from Mar-a-Lago, his private club in Palm Beach, Fla. Trump tweeted: “Congratulations Stephen Miller — on representing me this morning on the various Sunday morning shows. Great job!”