National Immigration Law Center says that there are reports that CBP at various airports is not abiding by the stay. In both their replies to the Tweet below and in my FB feed, people are citing lawyers on the ground and family members of the detained as saying the detainees are being told they will be put on planes and/or told to sign a voluntary waiver re: deportation without being told about the stay.
CBP has broad discretion to determine whether visa holders are admissible.
Also, it's important not to call a voluntary return (waiver) a deportation because the recourse between the two is very different. The former has not yet been admitted to the US and has very few options legally. The later has been admitted and has the full force of the US constitution applied. They might both remove you from the country but the process and protections available are nowhere close to being the same. Also, a deportation carries with it a 10 year ban from the country a voluntary return carries no such ban on rentry.
The state of California is suing President Trump over his executive order suspending visas and immigration benefits without the approval of Congress.
The document states Trump violated the Constitution as well as laws and treaties of the United States. The lawyers claim Trump did not do his job by protecting the civil rights of those living in the state of California, but also the United States.
I hope this video of Giuliani hurts the fuckers in court. If you want to skip to the part where he indicates it's a Muslim ban and that's what the president was wanting, it's at the 3:19 mark.
The state of California is suing President Trump over his executive order suspending visas and immigration benefits without the approval of Congress.
The document states Trump violated the Constitution as well as laws and treaties of the United States. The lawyers claim Trump did not do his job by protecting the civil rights of those living in the state of California, but also the United States.
You know, even if the judicial system fails us and ultimately upholds this EO, I am so proud and given faith in people because of all the people who protested, all the lawyers who ran to courthouses and airports, everyone who is donating, etc. Living up to those signs I saw at the march that said "First they came for the Muslims, and I said 'Not this time, motherfucker.'"
I hope this video of Giuliani hurts the fuckers in court. If you want to skip to the part where he indicates it's a Muslim ban and that's what the president was wanting, it's at the 3:19 mark.
Trump said he wanted a Muslim ban, so all these smart lawyers got together to enact a Muslim ban "legally" by focusing on "danger."
Jesus. Who wrote this guy's talking points? Or maybe "Trump wanted a muslim ban" is the talking point because it is Fox News and they want to remind the base that is watching that Trump continues to be the candidate that champions racism, religious prejudice, and xenophobia, so vote Trump 2020.
The state of California is suing President Trump over his executive order suspending visas and immigration benefits without the approval of Congress.
The document states Trump violated the Constitution as well as laws and treaties of the United States. The lawyers claim Trump did not do his job by protecting the civil rights of those living in the state of California, but also the United States.
California Secretary of State also gave the go ahead for the group seeking secession to proceed.
PLEASE READ + SHARE WIDELY THAT ATTORNEYS ON GROUND ARE REPORTING NONCOMPLIANCE WITH STAY AT LAX. -- Disheartening update from on the ground at LAX (current as of 8:50pm Pacific): A New York Federal Court has issued a nationwide stay of the Muslim Ban Executive Order. We are hearing reports that many airports immediately began releasing LPRs, non-immigrants and refugees as soon as the stay was issued. The stay means that Customs and Border Patrol must not deport (and therefore should release) any non-immigrants, LPRs or refugees. But, are we in the clear? NO. While there is some compliance, we are seeing non-compliance with the stay at LAX. People are still detained. Lawyers at LAX are still actively working on getting them released. Example case: Iranian LPR of 5 years has been detained with her one-year-old U.S. citizen son. She's already been granted U.S. citizenship, and her swearing-in ceremony is next month. She was allegedly asked to fill out a form 407 in which she would voluntarily abandon her status as a legal permanent resident. This is extremely troubling. Non-immigrants who were here on student visas were allegedly forced to sign forms withdrawing the application for their student visa. Example: Austrian permanent resident with Iranian citizenship was detained for 21 hours and then put back on an airplane back to Norway after the stay was issued. We view this as a violation of the stay. Lawyers are also still getting intake of new people who are being detained even though they arrived after the stay was issued. Congressmen and congresswomen are being denied access to talk to Customs and Border Patrol.
I am seriously crying for our country. This should not be real life in 2017. Ee need ALL of our elected officials to start standing up against this, the Reps and the Dems.
Customs & Border Protection is refusing to comply with the order and people are still stuck in detention at airports.
Also there is a rumor going around that they are inspecting Facebook pages and asking about the detainees' views on Trump.
If the rumor is true, I wish we had a list of detainees so we could change our names to theirs on FB. Anything to make it more difficult for Trump et al. to violate their rights.
The state of California is suing President Trump over his executive order suspending visas and immigration benefits without the approval of Congress.
The document states Trump violated the Constitution as well as laws and treaties of the United States. The lawyers claim Trump did not do his job by protecting the civil rights of those living in the state of California, but also the United States.
I'm off to read but how does CA have standing to sue over this? As summarized here it would seem like it's going to get dismissed for lack of standing.
The state of California is suing President Trump over his executive order suspending visas and immigration benefits without the approval of Congress.
The document states Trump violated the Constitution as well as laws and treaties of the United States. The lawyers claim Trump did not do his job by protecting the civil rights of those living in the state of California, but also the United States.
I'm off to read but how does CA have standing to sue over this? As summarized here it would seem like it's going to get dismissed for lack of standing.
(not a lawyer, but) from what I read they are suing as the people of the United States and the people of California.
Post by katietornado on Jan 29, 2017 4:32:20 GMT -5
DHS released a statement. This has Bannon's fingerprints all over it. Makes no mention of the 4 TROs, nor the decisions of the courts. OMFG what is happening to our country right now???
I'm off to read but how does CA have standing to sue over this? As summarized here it would seem like it's going to get dismissed for lack of standing.
(not a lawyer, but) from what I read they are suing as the people of the United States and the people of California.
I'd imagine b/c CA residents are affected that gives them standing
I'm off to read but how does CA have standing to sue over this? As summarized here it would seem like it's going to get dismissed for lack of standing.
(not a lawyer, but) from what I read they are suing as the people of the United States and the people of California.
States can't just sue because they want to anymore than you or I can. The plaintiff (bringing the suit) has to have been harmed or be facing imminent harm themselves. FWIW, a lot of people were arguing that Texas didn't have standing to sue over DAPA, and were found to have standing only because they would have had to have subsidized the cost of driver's licenses for more people if it went through. I'm curious as to how CA is claiming it is being harmed.
I worry that CA filing suit might make someone who for sure has standing not bother filing and if the CA case is dismissed on standing grounds time will have been wasted.
This is a long winded way of saying that I very much hope other cases have already been filed.
DHS released a statement. This has Bannon's fingerprints all over it. Makes no mention of the 4 TROs, nor the decisions of the courts. OMFG what is happening to our country right now???
One of the lines this has is that "less than 1 percent" of travelers were "inconvenienced" by the EO.
People were detained for like 21 hours without access to phones or lawyers. People were put on flights back to foreign countries. People got stranded elsewhere because their airlines wouldn't let them board planes.
(not a lawyer, but) from what I read they are suing as the people of the United States and the people of California.
States can't just sue because they want to anymore than you or I can. The plaintiff (bringing the suit) has to have been harmed or be facing imminent harm themselves. FWIW, a lot of people were arguing that Texas didn't have standing to sue over DAPA, and were found to have standing only because they would have had to have subsidized the cost of driver's licenses for more people if it went through. I'm curious as to how CA is claiming it is being harmed.
I worry that CA filing suit might make someone who for sure has standing not bother filing and if the CA case is dismissed on standing grounds time will have been wasted.
This is a long winded way of saying that I very much hope other cases have already been filed.
Yeah I don't understand this case. It wasn't filed by the AG, and regular people can't just file a suit that's styled in this way.
A friend of mine is getting back from a cruise today and said there's a couple people on the ship who are not being allowed to disembark because of this order. There will probably be more of these problems for a couple weeks.
A friend of mine is getting back from a cruise today and said there's a couple people on the ship who are not being allowed to disembark because of this order. There will probably be more of these problems for a couple weeks.
The nightmare doesn't end.
What the heck happens here? Do they get to just continue cruising? Who pays for that? Save