Editorial found on New York Times by The Editorial Board
released on April 23.
Starting
with the Trump v Hawaii a challenge to the legality
and constitutionality of President Trump’s travel ban. Which indefinitely bars
150 million people majority of them Muslim, from entering the United States.
The White House has learned from its
early mistakes that the original order which landed one week after Mr. Trump
took office and barred entry by all citizens of seven majority-Muslim
countries, was marked by such haste and dubious reasoning that it ran
immediately in trouble with federal judges across the country and intense public
outcry. Could the president be privy to inform the rest of us are not? In my
opinion yes he could! Although it might not be in our power to do something the
President should still hear the screaming voices because those people out there
screaming and fighting have a reason well enough to be heard I voices should
matter. Were the ones out there in the real world without protection. Do you
think president Donald Trump should have legal authority to issue this sort of
ban? Honestly I don’t think so. The three-judge panel of the appeals court
ruled that while federal immigration law gives the president the authority to
temporarily bar certain classes of noncitizens from entering a sweeping,
indefinite ban like Trump has exceeded. According to this Mr. Trump can exclude whomever he wants in order to protect
the country from attack, and no judge may second-guess him.
Mr. Trump is surrounded by anti immigrant
hard-liners, including his attorney general, Jeff Sessions, who donated one of
his favorite staffers, a zealot named Stephen Miller, to help draft the ban. Although
no one from the court seems to be happy with Mr.Trumps decisions they have faced
this challenge before back in the World War 2. Today, in the face of an
executive order again based on racial animus and unfounded fears, the justices
have the chance to deliver a very different message about executive power and
the meaning of America.
