J. David Ake/AP
On Monday, the Supreme Court saved President Trump's travel ban by continuing to block refugees from six mostly Muslim countries from entering the United States. When Trump first became president, he established a ban that forbade refugees from seven Muslim-majority countries from stepping foot in the United States. He ultimately revoked the first ban and replaced it with a less demanding version; one that only banned entry into the United States from six instead of seven countries.
Back in June, the Supreme Court partially supported the travel ban but said the administration could not secure people with "a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States." The measure was intended to only last 90 days, meaning in October the justices will hear the different arguments. The government also initially wanted to deny the right of grandparents and other extended family members from entering but a federal district judge stopped from doing so. As of today, the court continues to follow this ban restricting refugees and the federal appeals court decided the administration could not block grandparents nor refugees.
I believe the Supreme Court supporting this ban was a horrible decision in the first place. America has always been a welcoming country to anyone who wanted to obtain the American Dream or to someone who came here to start a new life. By banning individuals the right to live in the land of the free, it destroys the welcoming environment we once had. When the justices decide to talk about the ban, do you believe they should keep or remove the ban altogether?
Video Link: 59516bc3e4b0b07aa6605d4c_t_1498508262911_master.m3u8
Article Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/justice-dept-again-asks-supreme-court-to-allow-broad-enforcement-of-travel-ban/2017/09/11/6c3853ae-970b-11e7-87fc-c3f7ee4035c9_story.html?utm_term=.43eb2f7f406b
12 comments:
As someone who has family living in the banned countries, I personally cannot see the logic in banning any country just off the basis that the majority of the population practice a certain religion. Furthermore, the one country removed was one that carried a large threat of "terrorism" so it is quite difficult for me to believe the ban was done to "protect the United States". I completely agree that the ban has taken away from the mantra of our country and the freedom of achieving the "American dream" that had once been so widespread. I truly hope the justices are able to look past the ridiculous claims that have been made in support of this ban and remove it all together.
I also never agreed with Trump's ban to begin with. While I understand that supporters of this ban may argue that we need to protect the safety of the citizens within the US from the present threat of terrorism, I believe that a ban such as this is fairly counterintuitive as it fails to adhere to the fundamental american values of freedom and opportunity in a country that has always advocated new beginnings. It discriminates against countries, as Ariana stated, solely on the basis of their practices. It also merely accentuates the unfounded fears of Muslim american citizens, causing detriment to their safety. Even still, more specifically on the topic of the situation detailed in the article, I believe these refugees have gone through admissions and received formal assurances from resettlement agencies which naturally grants them the unequivocal right to enter our country.
As the son of immigrants who once seek a better life outside from their native country, I find it hard to believe that a country made of immigrants is blocking immigrants. I believe by banning Muslims, it starts a process of stigmatization. By ostracizing the minority, it creates a train of negative thought that builds up. Why aren't countries like Saudi Arabia banned? It is a country that lives in Sharia Law, so why the unfair treatment? It makes me believe that there is more to this story.
I think that if a ban were to be posed, it would have to be non discriminatory along racial or religious lines, meaning their would have to be a targeted threat that is being diminished by a ban. Whether or not the refugees are a credible threat is debatable. Certainly there may be threats (but I personally don't think it is that high). However, those with US citizenships, green cards, visas, or relations in the US with those credentials should not be banned.
In my opinion, the ban is ineffective and discriminatory, and is simply another play upon Americans' fear of Islam. However, from a political standpoint, I think that Donald Trump's rhetoric in favor of a ban is actually a smart move. Many of us like to think of the president as a total dunce, and some of his blunders may support that notion. However, I personally think that he is a lot smarter than he lets on. His "easy fix" solutions to complex issues like terrorism and illegal immigration are astoundingly appealing to the general American population. His unprofessional, disruptive persona is more accessible to the average American, who may be frustrated, fearful, and confused by the complexity of the events swirling around us on the world stage. I think that Donald Trump knows that the travel ban and some of his other policies are not feasible, but if his purpose is to appeal to the general public, then this doesn't really matter. Liberals are in the minority right now, and if his goal is to get reelected, he knows exactly who to pitch his policy to. This being said, if the goal of the travel ban is to stop terrorism, there's no way its going to work. Radical Islam is a belief system, not a race or a skin color. It is pretty well-known that most of the terror attacks throughout Europe in recent months have been committed not by refugees, but by European citizens. White people can be Muslims too, a fact that many Americans are either unaware of or refuse to accept. This controversy is not new to American politics, however. We have repeatedly had nativist parties rise up in order to "burn the bridge from which they came" throughout history. People often neglect that we in America were all immigrants at some point, and especially for working class Americans who are competing for jobs, it can seem at times to be unfair to let "foreigners" threaten our financial security and our safety. This xenophobia happened with the Irish, then the Chinese, then the Japanese. Arabs are just the next people on that list. If history repeats itself, we will eventually get over it. Of course, the travel ban doesn't help.
I understand the concern about national security, considering attacks in the past, but I do not think that the bans will be effective as they are too broad. I agree with Joshua that prohibiting entry based on religion does contribute to the stigma that our society has already created. This ban only adds on to the negativity and discrimination that Muslims in our country already face. This ban will only increase profiling and stereotyping, and will not benefit society very positively.
I think that the travel ban is an overreaction because islamic terrorism isnt much of a problem in the US just yet. There are very few islamic terrorist attacks that happen in the US currently and i believe that banning this many people form coming into the US is an unreasonable reaction to such a small problem. I still think that we should take strong precautions in order to keep radical islam out of the US but at this point in time there is no reason to take such strong actions against islamic terrorism.
I agree that since America is a country built from the ground up by immigrants originating from around the world, banning Muslim immigrants will be looked back upon in our history as a shameful decision by President Trump. It violates the ideals established in the 13th-15th amendment and implicitly acts in a racist manner against people of Muslim origin. What I am curious about, however, is what logic the Supreme Court used to justify its decision. What sort of constitutional amendment or law did the Court use to justify its decision?
Creating a travel ban on six specific countries will not do much if more dangerous people from other countries arrive in the US. Instead of implementing a travel ban, a more thorough background check would allow more safety and less stress for the immigrants. I'm not surprised that the supreme court agreed with the travel ban considering that the majority of the supreme court judges are Republican, and one was specifically picked by Donald Trump. Considering the technology we have today, banning immigrants from traveling to America is one of the worst ways to keep terrorism away. America shouldn't be denying access to those who want it as that would be against the identity of the United States.
I disagree with John's comment that we haven't seen Islamic terrorism in the US so we don't need this travel ban. Although the first part of that statement is correct, this is an example of a very reactionary ideology. Dealing with problems after they have already made an impact can reflect poorly on the government and can lead to an unnecessary loss of human life. This does not necessarily mean I support the ban I just detest a reactionary approach to terrorism. Furthermore, I would like to play devil's advocate and suggest to all the people saying this law is discriminatory that is has to be. Islamic terrorism is a real world threat and the terrorists are extremist Muslims so it makes sense to ban travel from countries that are predominantly Muslim. However this law definitely has to do with a difference in race and religious ideals. For example, if there were radical Catholics in Italy the US wouldn't ban all travel to Italy because Italians are white so they have a better connection to Trump and his followers.
I understand the tensions that have built up over the topic of terrorism, but I don’t believe implementing a travel ban will effective. The ban will only escalate the negativity surrounding immigration and discrimination. The US was seen as a country for new beginnings and opportunities, and by banning certain groups of people from that goes against our American values.
As an immigrant myself, I am very surprised to see America turning innocent people away from the "American Dream". The United States has always been a country full of hope and opportunities to a multitude of people around the world. Seeing these opportunities decreasing for people only because of where they live saddens me. I understand that Trump is putting that ban in place because of fear towards terrorism, but I don't understand why he is punishing everyone for something they have no control over. People in these countries have no control over terrorists. What is happening is not their fault whatsoever, however they are still being punished for and I think that is unfair to them.
Post a Comment