North America Editor Kate Burrows-Jones explains in detail the Administration (Department of Justice case ) and the counter argument put by the Washington State Attorney.
In an emergency motion, arguments were heard last night by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals whether to uphold or turn a lower court decision by Seattle Federal District Court Judge (Justice) James Robart which had previously placed a restraining order against President Donald J. Trump’s Executive order banning travel from seven countries. The court ruling is not expected today. Judges ( justices) Clifton, Canby and Friedland presided by telephone and were Live-streamed to the public in a conference call with the Government’s Special Counsel for the Department of Justice, August Flentje, and the plaintiff, Noah Purcell, Solicitor General for the State of Washington in the case of State of Washington and State of Minnesota v. Trump.
Live streaming from the 9th Circuit court of Appeals At 23:00 GMT – United States 6pm (18:00) EST tonight, there will be a critical juncture in the Trump administration’s leadership.
Team Trump’s power will be on trial, battled out in a hearing over his executive order banning travel from 7 countries. In the State of Washington & State of Minnesota v. Trump, each side will have 30 minutes to provide supporting arguments, by phone. The case will be heard by phone by three federal judges. The judges are Carter appointee, William C. Canby Jr, Obama appointee, Michelle T. Friedland, and George W Bush appointee Richard R. Clifton. Attorney Generals in 15 states and Washington DC sent in a memorandum arguing the ban hurts state universities and medical institutions.
The system works, but it doesn’t. We have seen how an executive order can be successfully challenged by the courts, which is a victory for democracy, except……Unfortunately, the San Francisco 9th Circuit, also know as the 9th Circus, is stacked with activist judges and has an extraordinary 67% rate of reversal. The president put in play an ill-conceived order, which he did not sell well to the public. The press didn’t read the order and jumped on the ‘Muslim ban’ bandwagon. The courts appear to have overturned it less on merit, than on politics. We the American people lose. What happens if we are faced with a real emergency? Has a precedent now been set that the Executive can’t impose a ban on certain immigrant and refugee groups. The most recent one is similar to a more isolated one President Barack Obama put in place to reaction to gaps in security screening brought to his attention by the FBI?
A petition signed by over one million, among whom 800,000 are British, will require MPs to discuss whether US President Donald Trump should be banned from a state visit. Any petition presented to parliament with over 100,000 signatures is automatically debated by MPs. The anti-Trump petition will be debated on Thursday, February 20th at Westminster Hall not in the main Commons Chamber. The MPs will also debate another petition, signed by half a million people and put up on Monday night, welcoming Mr Trump to the UK. The outcome of the debate only carries moral weight but has no effect on Government policy. A Sky News poll said 49% of Britons believe Trump should stay home.
By Kate Burrows-Jones, World Media North America Editor
President Trump Executive order is but sharpening existing laws set by his predecessor President Obama restricting entry to nationals of seven nations. ( below also include links to the full text of the order and related subjects)
Fake news indeed. There is no Executive order banning Muslims. President Donald Trump’s, perhaps ill-founded, ill-fated 90 day ban is based on President Barack Obama’s restrictions on Seven nations. Nobody cared when he did it, so was it a Muslim ban then? The law was written to address security concerns after the Paris Attacks, passing with overwhelming agreement. Voting was bipartisan, it passed the House 407-19. What Trump did was apply a sharp force, a halt on movement, and cruelly with no notice to let people prepare. Let the people decide if it is wrong, but to call it “Muslim” in nature, is also wrong without reading the full executive order.
In about 11 hours Prime Minister Theresa May will give a speech at Lancaster House, London to outline her strategy for leaving the European Union
by Kate Burrows-Jones WorldMedia North America Editor
In a keenly anticipated speech this morning, Prime Minister Theresa May is expected to formally announce that the United Kingdom is leaving the European Union and will present a strategy to do so. May will respond to critics, who have accused her of lacking a clear strategy for Brexit, by providing more detail than ever before regarding the Government’s plan. This comes as the Chancellor of the Exchequer , Philip Hammond, pledged that the country would do whatever it has to do if the EU attempts to impose tariffs and trade restrictions on the UK when it has left the EU.
Prime Minister David Cameron is to tackle the immigration policy designed to help millions of working people by putting new laws to control immigration una speech later this morning as part of proposed new bill the Queen speech state opening of parliament, next week, Downing Street sources reveal. But not many are convinced it will help address the main issue of influx of migrants from EU lowering wages in Britain