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.
Kate Burrows-Jones, North America Editor
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?
Kate Burrows-Jones , North America Editor
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.
Although most Members of parliament MPs who ( I’d say 90%) asking for a government white paper are a die-hard remainers/remoaners who’s aim is to delay and frustrate plans to trigger Article 50 hoping for a second referendum a handful are genuine in holding gov to account. But parties are standing in different position on the issue, only one Tory MP is with remain for example on triggering the article by end of March as the Prime Minister stated.
In reaction to the Supreme Court Ruling which went against the government, the latter is preparing a bill before parliament within days as secretary of State for Leaving the European Union David Dvis MP told the commons yesterday in a heated debate that helped flush out those who want reverse the result of the EU referendum.
During today’s Prime Minster’s questions the leaders of the opposition and one Tory backbenchers repeated the demand for a White paper. The white paper will be more or less the PM Lancaster House announced plan. This speech, unlike a ministerial statement, or a green/white paper, didn’t give MPs the chance to have a debate, the kind of ” dancing on a pinhead” pedantically structured arguments, duel of wits on the floor of the house etc. A white-paper will give this self-indulging chance. For the benefit of those unfamiliar with the different types of command papers, read the details below on the difference between Green and White paper:
Here is an example of either amateurish lazy below standard journalism, or a blatant bias by producers editors and a below standard under trained hacks who make up their minds before reporting a story.I am citing a radio report, broadcast on bbc radio four 13:00 (12:00 GMT) on Saturday 16 May 2015 reporting on sentencing former president Morsi of Egypt alongside other defendants. ..
With lack of a coherent strategy by western powers to contain the Islamic State Terror menace, Egypt and Jordan taking initiatives to take war into IS strongholds in Libya and Syria won populist approval as well as western leaders support, but this not enough; a wider world wide strategy and action is called for. It is now evident that the battle against the neo-Islamo-Fascism in the form of the self-proclaimed Islamic State took another twist in the early hours today when Egyptian air-force jets bombed weapons storage, training camps and sites occupied by IS terrorists in neighbouring Libya.
Why I am writing about the rubbish on the internet and why I, a staunch supporter of free expression, fierce opponent to censorship and anti-regulations, can see the point of ( and empathise with) many of the people who back a European court action to correct (good luck to them !!) information about them and their data on the internet. What inspired me is personal experience. Only yesterday I discovered, that a young lady, close to my heart, had the WRONG information about my date of birth and my faith ( which caused some serious damage to our affectionate relationship- I hope we can repair), from some rubbish on the internet. The other reason, unfortunately, my fellow hacks and hacketts, seldom check information for accuracy. Equally in 2009 the Media Editor of the Independent newspaper, PUBLISHED a story about me when I resigned my post as Director of the Media monitoring organisation Just Journalism, and labelled me wrongly ( ethnically), he neither bothered to contact me, nor to check his own newspaper archives.. I worked for The Independent since I joined when it was founded in 1986 and until 1998 ( and continued to write for the paper until four years ago), and my personal information and files were available in his newsdesk; instead of checking facts he ‘guessed’. This thought in my head also coincides with the row over google and correcting or deleting personal information. I sympathise with the people who scream for regulation, although as an old fashioned hack and a staunch libertarian, I am the last person in the world who’d agree on censorship or some regulation blocking access to information. but my personal experience and what you can do when WRONG and confusing information is out there for the world to see and you are powerless to correct them? Continue reading