Trump wasting no time in implementing "Muslim ban"

It looks like people who already have green cards and visas are being stopped at re-entry.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/trump-order-blocks-green-card-visa-holders-airports-article-1.2957910?cid=bitly

Tyrion

Trump's also stated that Christian refugees will be given higher priority for entry into the US than Muslims, making a characteristically bogus claim that that it was previously almost impossible for Christian refugees to be admitted to the US.

As an ESL teacher I've only had a couple of Syrian students who were new immigrants recently. Both were Christian, showing that Trump's claims aren't credible.

Large protest at NYC JFK airport now

syndicalist

Large protest at NYC JFK airport now

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Following-Detainment-Refugees-Welcome-Protest-Erupts-at-JFK-Airport-412046833.html

http://pix11.com/2017/01/28/protesters-gather-at-jfk-airports-terminal-4-after-refugees-detained-following-trumps-immigration-ban/

People with dual nationalities are also being prevented from entering the US for the next 90 days.
http://usuncut.com/news/trumps-ban-will-also-apply-citizens-duel-nationality/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Fleur

It looks like people who already have green cards and visas are being stopped at re-entry.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/trump-order-blocks-green-card-visa-holders-airports-article-1.2957910?cid=bitly

Fucking disgusting. I don't know what to say other than I know of family of my companion who had green cards when they escaped Poland because of the Nazis. Chilling.

I like how the examples Trump's given of terrorist events inside the US (9/11 and San Bernardino) were not perpetrated by people from any of the countries he's banning entry from. You'd think that if you're signing such an executive order, you'd at least back it up with credible examples. That's of course beside the point.

The world increasingly looks like the world of 1930s. If you are a working class radical from the middle east, you are likely to get stuck there and wait for persecution to find you. Communists must start thinking about ways to help their comrades that may be in need of solidarity. We need new international underground railroads.

Taxi drivers at JFK just did an hour-long stoppage:

http://jalopnik.com/new-york-taxi-workers-alliance-halting-jfk-airport-pick-1791737697

[quote=New York Taxi Worker Alliance]NYTWA STATEMENT ON MUSLIM BAN:
Professional drivers are over 20 times more likely to be murdered on the job than other workers. By sanctioning bigotry with his unconstitutional and inhumane executive order banning Muslim refugees from seven countries, the president is putting professional drivers in more danger than they have been in any time since 9/11 when hate crimes against immigrants skyrocketed.
Our 19,000-member-strong union stands firmly opposed to Donald Trump's Muslim ban. As an organization whose membership is largely Muslim, a workforce that's almost universally immigrant, and a working-class movement that is rooted in the defense of the oppressed, we say no to this inhumane and unconstitutional ban.
We know all too well that when government programs sanction outright Islamophobia, and the rhetoric of hate is spewed from the bully pulpit, hate crimes increase and drivers suffer gravely. Our Sikh and other non-Muslim brown and black members also suffer from anti-Muslim violence.
Today, drivers are joining the protest at JFK Airport in support of all those who are currently being detained at the airport because of Trump's unconstitutional executive order. Drivers stand in solidarity with refugees coming to America in search of peace and safety and with those who are simply trying to return to their homes here in America after traveling abroad. We stand in solidarity with all of our peace-loving neighbors against this inhumane, cruel, and unconstitutional act of pure bigotry.[/quote]

It's spread to SFO, where 700 protestors have gathered:

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/01/28/at-sfo-hundreds-protest-trumps-muslim-ban/

A judge just issued a temporary stay (thanks to Huli for the news updates):

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/01/muslim-ban-federal-court

Yes, the EO has been temporarily stayed-- to the degree that those with visas, and lawful permanent residents (green cards) cannot be deported. Some have been released, others are being detained in airports, and there is the risk of them being moved to detention centers.

This is how it starts, how the government bulks up the apparatus of repression: target the "other" in preparation for targeting anyone and everyone not falling into line.

Reports of an Islamic center being torched in Texas... what was that Insurgent Notes wrote about insisting that we not classify the "great majority" of Trump supporters as "fascists" or "pre-fascist"?

Taxi and limousine drivers did stop operations at JFK for an hour or so. The most important issue is if and will workers recognize this as an attack upon their class? It's no accident that Trump had a meeting with heads of building trades unions and the sheet metal workers, promising sugar plum fairy infrastructure projects 1 or 2 days before this, putting them securely in his back pocket.

Would be great if baggage handlers, flight crews withheld service in protest. Don't think it's likely.

Chaos, confusion in the application of the EO is to be expected-- that's what helps create the fear, and every real estate developer knows how important fear is to breaking a neighborhood and making it ripe for gentrification. Chaos is the lifeblood of arbitrage. No wonder the hedge-fund motherfuckers are behind this lout.

double post

S. Artesian

Would be great if baggage handlers, flight crews withheld service in protest.

Saw that Uber was scabbing on the taxis. The taxi drivers should reach out to them, as well as to all other transit workers. Attempts should be made to get everyone working at airports to be in solidarity. Difficult, but not impossible.

Saw this in the comments on the cabbie work stoppage at JFK, from a British pilot working for an Asian airline:

Somewhat unamusingly, an edict came down from our airline management via email about this. They were going to start holding the flight crews accountable for anyone who got on board who was turned away from the USA (it costs the airline an enormous amount of money when this happens.)

The pilot’s union essentially told them to ‘fuck off and grow a pair’ and their statement to the company pointed out that it is not the job of airline crew to enforce US immigration policy. I think the new policy lasted about an hour before it was rescinded.

Because there is now a huge amount of uncertainty and unpredictability around who may be detained or returned to their country of origin, airlines are not really sure what to do. We don’t generally carry any passengers whose nationalities fall under the new US President’s ‘I don’t do business there so it’s ok to ban them’ rule, but we do carry a huge number of Muslims and people who wear head-scarfs/sport exceptionally large and striking Muslim beards (not at the same time usually...)

This is a clusterfuck of epic proportions and I have a suspicion we are going to see our US routes, especially into the South, shrink dramatically whilst this is ongoing or there is any uncertainty over the policy.

Actions have occurred at the following airports:

JFK
Dulles
LAX
Atlanta
BOS
SFO
O'Hare
Philly
Detroit
Denver
Newark
Seattle

Any others?

The weakness of these protests is that they're crawling with Democratic Party opportunists and there have even been some Silicon Valley CEOs at SFO. The latter don't want to lose their reserve army of tech workers.

mikail firtinaci:

The world increasingly looks like the world of 1930s.

Steve Bannon:

"Darkness is good...Dick Cheney. Darth Vader. Satan. That's power. It only helps us when they...get it wrong. When they're blind to who we are and what we're doing....It will be as exciting as the 1930s"

- here: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/steve-bannon-trump-tower-interview-trumps-strategist-plots-new-political-movement-948747

Hieronymous

The weakness of these protests is that they're crawling with Democratic Party opportunists.

for example ...

‘This Is Not Who We Are’: Hillary Clinton Tweets Support for Airport Protests

http://www.mediaite.com/online/this-is-not-who-we-are-hillary-clinton-tweets-support-for-airport-protests/

There was no secret and no mystery to the 19.5% sale of Rosneft-- it was sold to a consortium made up of Glencore (big commodities trading/mining form) and the Qatar Investment Authority. The parties are not unknown.

We should dig a little deeper before circulating false reports.......

The acting Attorney General (an Obama appointee that was supposed to serve until Trump's AG is confirmed by Congress) directed the Justice Department to not enforce Trump's immigration executive order earlier today. Trump just dismissed her in the last hour.

Hieronymous

S. Artesian

Would be great if baggage handlers, flight crews withheld service in protest.

Saw that Uber was scabbing on the taxis. The taxi drivers should reach out to them, as well as to all other transit workers. Attempts should be made to get everyone working at airports to be in solidarity. Difficult, but not impossible.

Saw this in the comments on the cabbie work stoppage at JFK, from a British pilot working for an Asian airline:

Somewhat unamusingly, an edict came down from our airline management via email about this. They were going to start holding the flight crews accountable for anyone who got on board who was turned away from the USA (it costs the airline an enormous amount of money when this happens.)

The pilot’s union essentially told them to ‘fuck off and grow a pair’ and their statement to the company pointed out that it is not the job of airline crew to enforce US immigration policy. I think the new policy lasted about an hour before it was rescinded.

Because there is now a huge amount of uncertainty and unpredictability around who may be detained or returned to their country of origin, airlines are not really sure what to do. We don’t generally carry any passengers whose nationalities fall under the new US President’s ‘I don’t do business there so it’s ok to ban them’ rule, but we do carry a huge number of Muslims and people who wear head-scarfs/sport exceptionally large and striking Muslim beards (not at the same time usually...)

This is a clusterfuck of epic proportions and I have a suspicion we are going to see our US routes, especially into the South, shrink dramatically whilst this is ongoing or there is any uncertainty over the policy.

Actions have occurred at the following airports:

JFK
Dulles
LAX
Atlanta
BOS
SFO
O'Hare
Philly
Detroit
Denver
Newark
Seattle

Any others?

The weakness of these protests is that they're crawling with Democratic Party opportunists and there have even been some Silicon Valley CEOs at SFO. The latter don't want to lose their reserve army of tech workers.

A fascist got KO'd at pdx.

Tyrion's post #18 is interesting.
And so is this:
https://medium.com/@jakefuentes/the-immigration-ban-is-a-headfake-and-were-falling-for-it-b8910e78f0c5#.hxbruudeo

Firing an attorney general who disagrees with you. Before I thought people claiming that Trump's government is a fascist one were exaggerating but now I'm really not so sure.

Seems like they are trying to do away with the judiciary. On Whitehouse.gov, it's no longer get listed as a branch of government.

edit: it's listed again. I didn't take a screen grab for when it was missing.

cactus9

Firing an attorney general who disagrees with you.

This happens in Turkey all the time

Sewer Socialist

A fascist got KO'd at pdx.

is there video?

Khawaga

Seems like they are trying to do away with the judiciary.

See this twitter thread: https://mobile.twitter.com/CharESilver/status/826447357105491968

The acting AG instructing the Justice Department to not go along with Trump's immigration executive order was out of the ordinary, but somewhat symbolic, as she was going to be out of a job by today or tomorrow anyway. Still, I suppose Democrats growing even some portion of a spine in the face of a far right onslaught is better than nothing.

Juan Conatz

The acting AG instructing the Justice Department to not go along with Trump's immigration executive order was out of the ordinary, but somewhat symbolic, as she was going to be out of a job by today or tomorrow anyway.

agree with all this.
unfortunately she provided trump with a bit of theater as he gets to burnish his strongman image by canning her the same day to the delight of his base.

I will add that I believe the last time a sitting President dismissed an attorney general over a disagreement was Nixon dismissing an acting AG over their refusal to dismiss the special investigator looking into Watergate. The acting AG at that time was acting because the previous one had resigned over this issue.

Looks like around 1,000 employees (possibly 1/7 of the workforce?) of the State Department signed a 'dissent memo' against the immigration executive order. As I understand it, these dissent memos were created during the Vietnam era as a formal, private way of registering dissent on major policy issues without being retaliated against.

Juan Conatz

The acting AG at that time was acting because the previous one had resigned over this issue.

that was robert bork

Juan Conatz

I will add that I believe the last time a sitting President dismissed an attorney general over a disagreement was Nixon dismissing an acting AG over their refusal to dismiss the special investigator looking into Watergate. The acting AG at that time was acting because the previous one had resigned over this issue.

Interesting, although I didn't really think this was a big deal. Attorney generals are political appointees. My understanding is that that one had been appointed by Obama and was serving out the last bit of time before being due to be replaced by whoever Trump appointed in any case

Khawaga

Seems like they are trying to do away with the judiciary. On Whitehouse.gov, it's no longer get listed as a branch of government.

Holy shit, is that actually true?!?

petey

Juan Conatz

The acting AG at that time was acting because the previous one had resigned over this issue.

that was robert bork

No, Bork was the third one up after one resigned and one was apparently fired.

petey

Juan Conatz

The acting AG at that time was acting because the previous one had resigned over this issue.

that was robert bork

Wasn't it Archibald Cox who was fired in the "Saturday Night Massacre"?

Steven.

Interesting, although I didn't really think this was a big deal. Attorney generals are political appointees. My understanding is that that one had been appointed by Obama and was serving out the last bit of time before being due to be replaced by whoever Trump appointed in any case

Yeah, that's how the transition from administrations works. The incoming one usually asks some people to stay on. That's what happened with her. She had a different position under Obama, Trump asked her to stay on until his guy was confirmed.

I don't know about a big deal, but it is certainly unusual in modern American political history. I think it also shows probably the limit of what Democratic resistance to Trump is going to be like...symbolic and easily overcome.

Hieronymous

petey

Juan Conatz

The acting AG at that time was acting because the previous one had resigned over this issue.

that was robert bork

Wasn't it Archibald Cox who was fired in the "Saturday Night Massacre"?

Cox was the special prosecutor who was eventually fired by Bork after one AG resigned and one AG was fired.

Hieronymous

petey

Juan Conatz

The acting AG at that time was acting because the previous one had resigned over this issue.

that was robert bork

Wasn't it Archibald Cox who was fired in the "Saturday Night Massacre"?

yes. ruckelshouse the AG was told to fire him and refused and resigned. his asst also refused and resigned. then bork was brought in and did it.

interesting times. iwas a kid then just getting into politics and didn't know that assassinations and things like watergate were dramatic and unusual.

dp

Bush admin did have alberto gonzales scandal though, not too different

Alberto Gonzales stepped down and only because public pressure was gonna make the Bush Administration look bad (back when politicians cared about such things). I think that's quite different than being fired for refusing orders from the President.

Not really what i meant, im saying the scandal of replacing us attorneys

Chili

Holy shit, is that actually true?!?

It was taken out, but seems like it's back again. (unfortunately I didn't take a screen grab for when it was missing). Could have actually just been a mistake... but hard to figure out what are mistakes and what is deliberate.

mikail firtinaci

cactus9

Firing an attorney general who disagrees with you.

This happens in Turkey all the time

Exactly. Trump has a copy of Erdogan playbook on his nightstand.

Juan Conatz

I suppose Democrats growing even some portion of a spine in the face of a far right onslaught is better than nothing.

Yes, a symbolic willingness to refuse orders and get fired prior to you being laid off that week is better than that for sure.

Re the Nixon firings: Elliot Richardson was the Attorney General. Nixon told him to fire Archibald Cox, the special prosecutor for the Watergate break-in. Richardson refused. Nixon fired him. Nixon then instructed William Ruckelshaus, the deputy AG, to fire Cox, and he refused. Nixon fired him too.

Nixon then turned to Bork, who was Solicitor General, essentially the office in charge of preparing and arguing the govt briefs in court cases, and Bork agreed to fire Cox. This became known as the Saturday Night Massacre.

Gonzales is something else. He had to resign as he developed a hit list of US attorneys marked for removal because they wouldn't, couldn't, sign on to creating false voter fraud cases. It had nothing to do with "defying" the president.

It is critical to note the Trump administration's response to Yates and the career diplomats using the "dissent" channel-- the accusation being that they have "betrayed" the president. Of course, the oath administered to those in diplomatic and govt. dept. positions says nothing about loyalty to or defending the president, but rather loyalty to and defending the constitution.

S. Artesian

Re the Nixon firings: Elliot Richardson was the Attorney General.

ah, right. ruckelshouse was the asst.

About 1K protested in Minneapolis-St.Paul Intl airport (MSP) on Jan 28th & 29th. The Twin Ciies are home to the biggest Somali community in North America - one of the nationalities singled out in the regime's order. Members of the Twin Cities IWW General Defense Committee participated and one member got to speak, calling for international working-class solidarity. Otherwise the action, while full of enthusiasm and energy, was quite liberal - including singing the national anthem and reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.

http://www.startribune.com/franken-and-klobuchar-call-trump-ordered-travel-ban-irresponsible-and-probably-unconstitutional/412089013/

KDog yeah in the TC we have a high population of Somali and other Muslim cab drivers. I take at least 4-6 cabs a week we need to figure out spreadung GDC networks and philosophy to them....a lot of whom were already pissed at Uber and now Trump

Getting court orders against the Muslim ban is one thing, enforcing them is another:

https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/charlotte-silver/are-us-marshals-refusing-enforce-court-orders-against-trumps-muslim-ban

petey

is there video?

https://youtu.be/TwhMkwjsBFM

you can't really tell what's going on, but he reportedly grabbed someone by the throat.

News reports this morning are saying that the Department of Homeland Security has "suspended all actions to implement President Donald Trump's immigration order."

Anyone know anything further?

mis-post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/state-dept-reverses-visa-revocations-allows-banned-travelers-to-enter-us/2017/02/04/0ab5880a-eaee-11e6-bf6f-301b6b443624_story.html

The State Department says previously banned travelers will be allowed to enter the United States after a federal judge in Washington state on Friday temporarily blocked enforcement of President Trump’s controversial immigration ban.

“We have reversed the provisional revocation of visas under” Trump’s executive order, a State Department spokesman said Saturday. “Those individuals with visas that were not physically canceled may now travel if the visa is otherwise valid.”

Department of Homeland Security personnel “will resume inspection of travelers in accordance with standard policy and procedure.”

"standard" i assume meaning "status quo ante"

A federal appeals court early Sunday rejected a request by the Justice Department to immediately restore President Trump’s targeted travel ban, deepening a legal showdown over his authority to tighten the nation’s borders in the name of protecting Americans from terrorism.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/04/us/politics/visa-ban-trump-judge-james-robart.html

The historical echoes of Trump's immigration ban

The Architecture of Race in American Immigration Law: A Reexamination of the Immigration Act of 1924

Wojtek, thanks for those links. Racially based immigration quotas and restrictions stretch from the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 through the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965. Bigoted bans and limitations are nothing new in the U.S.

9th Circuit Court of Appeals refuses to lift District Court temporary restraining order while arguments being prepared for court date.

The US Dept of Justice can appeal to Supreme Court, but the terms of the 9th's decision do not materially impact on the issue of the legality of the ban; so the appeal to the USSC would be only for a lifting of the temporary restraining order while the argument is advanced through the judicial system.

The government theoretically could appeal to the USSC to rule on the merits of the EO itself, but it is very unlikely that the court would be willing to hear that appeal without argument being made, and a decision being reached in the lower courts--, the rule of thumb being that courts decide matters on the narrowest grounds available, as the 9th just demonstrated.