Amicus briefs against Trump’s travel ban: the strongest arguments

Several groups and businesses have waded into the dispute over Donald Trump’s travel ban, adding their voices to the mounting opposition to the executive order, which is currently blocked pending a decision by the ninth circuit court of appeals in San Francisco. The court has set a deadline for briefs of 6pm ET (3pm PT) on Monday, and may rule within days. Here are some of the most outspoken comments drawn from “amicus briefs” – legal arguments lodged in court by interested parties, known legally as “amici” (friends) – calling for the ban to be overturned:

Ninety-seven US tech firms, including Apple, Microsoft, Google, eBay and Lyft

“America proudly describes itself as “a nation of immigrants”. Immigrants make many of the Nation’s greatest discoveries and create some of the country’s most innovative and iconic companies. Immigrants are among our leading entrepreneurs, politicians, artists and philanthropists. The experience and energy of people who come to our country to seek a better life for themselves and their children – to pursue the “American Dream” – are woven throughout the social, political, and economic fabric of the Nation.

[Trump’s executive] order effects a sudden shift in the rules governing entry into the United States, and is inflicting substantial harm on US companies. It hinders the ability of American companies to attract great talent; increases costs imposed on business; makes it more difficult for American firms to compete in the international marketplace; and gives global enterprises a new, significant incentive to build operations – and hire new employees – outside the United States.”

Ten former national security officials including former secretaries of state John Kerry and Madeleine Albright and former director of the CIA Leon Panetta

“The United States faces real threats from terrorist networks and must take all prudent and effective steps to combat them, including the appropriate vetting of travelers to the US. We are nevertheless unaware of any specific threat that would justify the travel ban. We view the order as one that ultimately undermines the national security of the United States, rather than making us safer. In our professional opinion, this order cannot be justified on national security or foreign policy grounds.

It does not perform its declared task of “protecting the nation from foreign terrorist entry into the United States”. To the contrary, the order disrupts thousands of lives, including those of refugees and visa holders all previously vetted by standing procedures that the administration has not shown to be inadequate. It could do long-term damage to our national security and foreign policy interests, endangering US troops in the field and disrupting counterterrorism and national security partnerships.”

Harvard, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Tufts, Boston University and other Massachusetts-based academic institutions

“Over the course of the past week, amici institutions have seen their students stranded abroad and their faculty members prevented from travelling to and from foreign countries. Scholars based abroad have expressed a determination to boycott academic conferences in the United States, and potential faculty recruits have expressed serious doubts about teaching at amici’s schools. These consequences undermine amici’s bedrock commitment to serving the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the United States, and the world through innovative teaching and research.

[The executive order] undermines the values and contributions of open academic exchange and collaboration. At bottom, those adverse impacts impair the cross-border exchange of ideas that is critical to amici’s success as educational institutions – and to the success of the country as a whole.”

American Civil Liberties Union

“The United States Constitution forbids the government from discriminating on the basis of religion. The order is motivated by bias against Muslims, as confirmed by the President’s own public statements, as well as the absence of any rational justification for the categorical exclusion of individuals from the seven identified nations or the complete ban on refugees from around the world. The religious discrimination involved in the Executive Order is inconsistent with the bedrock Establishment Clause and equal protection principle that the government should never favor one religion over another.

The order profoundly, directly and irreparably harms people throughout the United States, destabilizing the lives of thousands of individuals and their families – including those seeking to live, find refuge, visit, study or work in the State of Washington. Under the Order, US citizens and legal permanent residents are unable to maintain their relationships with their families when their family members are denied entry at our borders. Those fleeing persecution cannot find a safe harbor here. And workers and students with valid visas will lose their right to live, work, and study here if they travel abroad.”

HIAS, a global Jewish non-profit group that protects refugees

“There is no rational basis for the suspension of the Refugee Program because refugees trying to enter the United States are already subject to an intensive investigation, which can last for as long as two years, and which includes personal interviews and biometric analyses, and vetting by the United Nations High Commission on Refugees, the National Counterterrorism Center, the FBI’s Terrorist Screening Center and the departments of State, Defense and Homeland Security.

The Executive Order has fractured many refugee families whose safety and desire for unification were already fragile, and risks the lives of many who relied on the promises of the United States when they received their visas. Those people made irreversible plans to leave the countries in which they were residing, and followed established procedures to obtain their visas and permission to enter the United States. The Executive Order closes the door to their hope of avoiding the immense dangers that they currently face, leaving them in the perilous situation.”

Americans United for Separation of Church and State

“The First Amendment mandates governmental neutrality with respect to religion. This principle, contained in the First Amendment’s Religion Clauses and reflected also in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, secures the right to religious freedom by straightforwardly forbidding official discrimination on the basis of religion. Ignoring the clear constitutional command, however, the government has singled out a religious group – Muslims – for official disfavor and maltreatment. By instituting a wide-ranging, punishing ban on immigrants, the government has run roughshod over core First Amendment protections.

The Executive Order is exactly what President Trump promised all along – a “Muslim ban”. No amount of rebranding will change that. People from seven countries are refused entry to the United States for no reason other than their deity and preferred holy book. Beyond failing every applicable legal standard, the Executive Order is an insult to the fundamental principles of our Constitution. It cannot stand. It should not stand even for a day.”

Source: The Guardian