Today’s news regarding immigration is both positive and negative.
There is both good news and bad news in all this I think…Again, few people take this complex position.
I listened to NPR in the car, which was hostile to the Trump administration’s executive orders. NPR ran a series of sob stories on the injustices done to people trying to come to America, just because they were from Syria.
NPR, however, ignored the backstory, failing to acknowledge that Obama-Clinton policies, which supported anti-Gaddafi and anti-Assad Islamic radicals, set fire to the Middle East. So all the blame went to Trump, and none went to the previous administration. And how much vetting can really happen when people leave a country with just the shirt on their back, and when local records were destroyed. Interviews only, I think.
On the other side of the spectrum, the timing of the news release regarding the airport detention is a little suspicious.
Someone, somewhere, and not in the White House, knows perfectly well that Hameed Khalid Darweesh, of Iraq, is an American loyalist and served as an interpreter to the 101st Airborne. (There are agencies that know absolutely everything about everyone getting on these planes). But they decided to detain him anyway, and splash it on the news.
Some of the powers that be (and I’m not talking about the White House) actually want to stir up this controversy, to get both sides really riled up.
Hopefully, this latest immigration controversy will be settled by the Supreme Court, and not tried in the news.
My prediction is that the Trump administration will go 50/50, or bat .500, however you want to look at it.
One major victory will be the likely confirmation that yes, the executive branch can ban or suspend immigration from certain countries. The president has that authority.
Mayors and governors are posturing… While “sanctuary cities” might find ways around handing over local suspects to the feds, here and there, at the end of the day the executive branch can review inmate lists, review their immigration status, and just take the prisoners it wants.
Immigration law falls under federal and not state or local jurisdiction. The feds do not need state or local cooperation…
However, the Trump administration will probably lose those cases in the Supreme Court pertaining to “permanent residents” and “citizens” of the United States.
Across American history, the Supreme Court has found that aliens residing legally in the United States are entitled to “substantive due process” as individuals. This basic decision was reflected by the Supreme Court case Zadvydas v. Davis (2001). But the precedent goes way, way back.
This should mean that the feds have to try each alien resident case, one at a time, in court.
Also, the Supreme Court has historically been very adamant in its defense of American citizenship. It is extremely difficult to revoke an American’s citizenship and all the rights and privileges thereof, including entry into the US.
That an American might hold a Sudanese passport matters not. He or she would have to be taken to court, where the feds would probably lose unless there was real evidence of conspiring to attack the US. In a normal world. Maybe all bets are off, but that would be the normal situation.
The basic concept here is that the American system is based on the principle of “popular sovereignty,” meaning that citizens come before the formation of any government.
So, basically, an American’s right to be a citizen comes before any administration’s right to even exist – before any president’s right to even call himself or herself “president.”
If legal precedent is any example, the Supreme Court will likely reaffirm that American citizenship would trump virtually everything, and would even trump Trump.
The Trump administration will probably win many of its legal battles with the cities and states. The law is on its side, despite liberal and media outcry.
However, the Trump administration will probably not win in its efforts (if it follows through) to redefine the rights and privileges of legal residents and citizens.
So, it is 50/50. Win some, lose some. Lose some, win some.
However one chooses to look at it.