You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
0

[–] irregularverb ago 

The President's Executive Order is legal. The Seattle Judge is suggesting that it is illegal because it unconstitutionally discriminates against Islam. Well, lets do a quick analysis. From the Judge's perspective the order would have to be unconstitutional on its face, i.e., the order explicitly bans Muslims, or alternatively, the order could be unconstitutional in effect by causing harm to Muslims but not other religions. Obviously, the order is NOT discriminatory on its face because the words Muslim or Islam are NEVER mentioned. So all we are left with now is the question of whether the executive order applies equally to members of all different religions. The answer appears to be that the travel was applied equally to everyone from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen without any consideration given to religion. There is no evidence that government officials even knew the religion of the persons stopped at the airport. Additionally, more Muslims live in India and Indonesia than live in the countries that are included in the ban, yet Muslims from India, Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, and everywhere else from around the world are free to travel to the U.S. with proper documentation. There were ten of thousands of Muslims that traveled to the U.S. during the ban so it would be impossible to say that the ban targets Muslims. The ban simply targeted countries (except Iraq) where the U.S. does not have good diplomatic liaison or intel officers in country. It was intended to be a short term temporary ban to give the government time to figure out how to vet people from countries where you cannot even check with the local police to see if a person is good or bad because there is no functioning central government. Totally reasonable and prudent