Thursday, March 16, 2017

Trump To Appeal After A New Camouflage


Dumped by his anti-Muslim rhetoric, Donald Trump announced Thursday his intention to appeal the suspension of his second migratory decree, a slap that plunges the US president into a laborious political-judicial battle.


"We intend to appeal this erroneous decision," White House spokesman Sean Spicer said. He said that the lawyers of the executive would adopt the best strategy of recourse after having previously obtained "clarifications" on the decisions rendered.

In the space of a few hours, two federal judges blocked Wednesday evening and Thursday morning the application of the controversial text, which banished the entry of the United States to the nationals of six Muslim countries.

These two courts have upheld the Democratic states and the associative activists who affirm that the decree aims to discriminate against Muslims.

Condemning a "politicized" justice, Mr. Trump denounced "an unprecedented abuse of power" and a halt to his policy "making the United States look weak".

Just as after the suspension on 3 February of his first anti-immigration decree, the president promised to continue the fight before the courts, until victory.

"We are going to take this case as far as it needs to the Supreme Court, if necessary." "We will win, we will protect our citizens at all costs," Donald Trump said at a public meeting in Tennessee.

Judges not convinced


The decree rejected had, however, been presented by Mr. Trump as unassailable from a legal point of view, having been redacted from its most contested elements which had aroused exaggerated reactions in its first version.

These polishing efforts did not convince the two magistrates concerned, the first in Hawaii, the second in the State of Maryland.




"A supposed and objective observer (...) must conclude that this decree was issued with the aim of disadvantaging a particular religion," Hawaii judge Derrick Watson said in his decision.
The new decree is "the concretization, long envisaged, of the prohibition of entry (in the United States) to the Muslims," ​for its part decided the judge of Maryland Theodore Chuang.

The latter, however, suspended only part of the text, targeting the interruption of visa issuance for the six Muslim countries concerned.

The two lawyers, who held hearings Wednesday only a few hours before the decree's implementation, said they based their opinion on past statements by Mr. Trump and his advisors.

The US president is thus reminded that his rhetoric against Muslims has a cost, although it goes back mainly to the time of the campaign when the Republican candidate had suggested closing the American borders to all Muslims.

Judge Chuang was seized by a coalition of liberal and refugee organizations, including the powerful American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

"Religious animosity" 


To justify his decision, Judge Watson assured him that the temporary suspension of the decree would avoid "irreparable harm". The decree, he said, includes "significant and irrefutable proofs of religious animosity".

This second decree provided for the temporary closure of US borders to refugees from around the world and the suspension of visas for 90 days for nationals of Iran, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen.

The scheme no longer concerned Iraq and exempted the holders of visas and "green cards", sesames of permanent residents.

The first decree of 27 January abruptly caused chaos in the airports and provoked outrageous reactions abroad as well as numerous demonstrations in the United States.

His application was blocked by a Seattle judge, James Robart, a decision later validated by a San Francisco Court of Appeals on 9 February, urging the Republican president to review his copy.

Judge Robart, also seized on the second decree, must make a new decision after hearing the parties Wednesday.

Rendered first and broader, the decision of the Federal Court of Hawaii will, in any case, be binding on the other courts.

According to its critics, the new text would have had very negative consequences on the sectors of education and business, especially for companies with new technologies.

No comments: