“Not a pretext of religious discrimination?” Wrong

 

“The exclusion of aliens is also a core federal prerogative: a power ‘inherent in sovereignty, necessary for maintaining normal international relations and defending the country against foreign encroachments and dangers…” 

On 3/27 nearly a month after Donald Trump’s proposed travel ban 2.0 was affirmed in a circuit appeals court, an amicus brief, a document filed in response for court case consideration, was filed. The authors were attorneys generals from 12 Republican led states including Texas, Florida, and Louisiana along with Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant. Headlines across the country read that Trump order was now backed by many prominent immigration prone states, the actual brief basically stated:

States included in amicus brief supporting travel ban.

• States do not have the authority to set immigration standards that threaten citizen safety and national security.
• Congress has delegated the case of immigration limitation to the executive branch and this is a utilization of that.
• The order is not a pretext of religious discrimination.
• The Obama administration also identified the same 6 countries banned as “countries of concern.”
• “The Executive Order does not violate due process because nonresident aliens abroad have no liberty interest in seeking admission into the country; therefore, no constitutional claims accrue from a suspension of those aliens’ ability to enter.”

First and foremost not a month goes by without a U.S. citizen or SUSPECTED terrorist being killed in unmanned drone strikes, given no form of due process. Which has led to multiple lawsuits on both the Obama and Trump administrations by organizations like the ACLU and CCR. The case the states involved make in the generic facade idea of banning the terrorists and criminals, for unspoken religious reasons. The less than 1% makeup of Muslims in America mainly occupy the south and midwest which have seen major gains in Muslim followers since 2000.

Graph shows % change of Islam adherence from 2000-2010.

The states that have seen the largest rises in Muslim populations are also the same states in which Islam is the largest non Christian groups. Those states include: Texas, Arkansas, Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, Florida, West Virginia, and South Dakota, EIGHT of the THIRTEEN states that have also pledged their support behind the travel ban. Although the brief claims the ban is not for religious reasons, why would the state governments of the mainly Muslim populated states urge for passage? Many friends and family of those in these states would have no form of transportation unless verified already and traveling back and forth is extremely unpredictable just as in the case after the first inaction of the ban.

The lack of statistics in the brief are extremely questionable and just seem like a following of political and party politics with disregard of those living in their own states.

---

Sources:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/the-four-wrong-numbers-behind-trumps-immigration-ban/515025/

http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/08/us/muslims-in-america-shattering-misperception/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/27/most-and-least-muslim-states_n_1626144.html

http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/13-states-rally-support-trump-travel-ban/

The Cost of Isolation

President Trump’s travel ban on six Muslim-Majority countries that had initially been met with ethical backlash is now causing serious economic trouble.  The restrictions have sent an inhospitable message to the international world and in turn, reflect on tourism.  Companies and businesses that would have looked towards the U.S. for trips and meetings are beginning to back out in fear of employees having travel difficulties.  Airline bookings have taken a hit in the wake of the initial travel ban announcement on January 27th and after word of the revised plan on March 6th.  Unfortunately, the hospitality industry is feeling the effects too and have experienced less occupancy in February.  Arnie Sorenson, CEO of Marriott International, says that the company “suffered a 3% decline in international bookings to the U.S. in February, according to a March 21 earnings call. The drop included a 25% to 30% decline from the Middle East and a 10% decline from Mexico”.  The drop from a country like Mexico which is not directly included in the travel ban hints at worsening diplomatic ties.  The present and future implications of the ban are abundant and widespread.  Students from all around the world seek out the United States as a destination to study, but the new restrictions compromise that.

Airline bookings have taken a hit in the wake of the initial travel ban announcement on January 27th and after word of the revised plan on March 6th.  Unfortunately, the hospitality industry is feeling the effects too and have experienced less occupancy in February.  Arnie Sorenson, CEO of Marriott International, says that the company “suffered a 3% decline in international bookings to the U.S. in February, according to a March 21 earnings call. The drop included a 25% to 30% decline from the Middle East and a 10% decline from Mexico”.  The drop from a country like Mexico which is not directly included in the travel ban hints at worsening diplomatic ties.

The present and future implications of the ban are abundant and widespread.  Students from all around the world seek out the United States as a destination to study, but the new restrictions compromise that.  United by their concern, six hundred colleges wrote to Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly on Feb. 3 fretting over losing international students.  This comes at quite the cost, one million international students spend $32 billion a year according to the senior vice president for the American Council on Education.  The theme here is that the U.S. is on track to miss out on a lot of money as a result of the travel ban.  U.S. tourism is a $250 billion industry.  The Tourism Economics of Wayne, Pennsylvania project that the United States will welcome in 4.3 million fewer international travelers in 2017, accounting for a loss of $7.4 billion.  It is odd that a president so grounded in business like Trump does not see the financial harm that the travel ban will cause.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/03/29/trumps-travel-ban-could-cost-18b-us-tourism-travel-analysts-say/99708758/

 

Introduction

            As a group, we will examine the current and future U.S. immigration reform, including travel ban policies as well as plans to build the wall on the Mexican border. We intend to relay to our readers that the proposed ideas at least as of now could be detrimental not only financially but also to the makeup of our society/culture. We will keep up to date with stories concerning diplomacy between the U.S. and Mexican governments and future implications for visa holders and the like.