Fox News’ irascible host Bill O’Reilly recently did his best to cut through all of the politics and all of the double-speak to figure out what was really going on with the Trump immigration executive order. What O’Reilly discovered is the worrisome truth that, right now, there is nothing stopping a terrorist from those 7 majority Muslim (and terrorist filled) nations from acquiring a fake passport and flying to the United States.
A truly terrifying thought.
So let’s cut through all the mumbo-jumbo and political hackery.
Here’s what is really happening.
The Trump administration believes that terrorists in nations with no central control can get to the USA in a way that is dangerous.
Hypothetically, an ISIS killer could board a plane in Tripoli, Libya with a fake passport then fly to Paris change planes and fly on to New York City.
Nobody in Libya will vet that man, so he would arrive here with a decent chance of entry.
Therefore the president wants to impose stronger security oversight on nations like Libya and six others that are essentially in chaos.
Federal law seems to favor the president:
Section 212 states:
“Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens …”
The law seems clear.
So Mr. Trump suspended immigration in seven countries for 90 days; for Syria he also stopped refugees from entering until further notice.
Enter the states of Minnesota and Washington, where the attorney’s general challenged the travel ban, saying it harmed individuals and businesses and was unconstitutional because it targeted Muslims.
A federal judge in Washington then blocked President Trump’s order, and just two hours ago a federal appeals court upheld the block unanimously.
Why?
The three appeals court judges basically ruled that there is no urgency to stop travel from the seven countries, and that there are strong arguments on both sides that should be reviewed.
The judges also wrote that no irreparable injury would be caused by a stay of the president’s order, and that the courts should eventually decide whether the order is constitutional.
The judges basically saying more legal vetting is needed of the terrorist vetting plan.
Talking Points believes there is more than a little political motivation in his case.
No question Minnesota and Washington State took the action because of liberal politics. They believe the president is anti-Muslim.
As for the appeals court, it’s impossible to say with certainty what motivated their decision.
If you take them at their word they want more legal hearings on the matter.
President Trump says the decision to block is purely political and that his Justice Department will take it to the Supreme Court.
I say good. Let’s see if federal law which again is clear in this case means anything anymore.
In the meantime, anyone coming here from the seven nations cited can expect a substantial wait at the airport.
Tags: Bill O'Reilly ISIS
Join the conversation!
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.