Month: February 2017

Former National Security Officials Call Trump Executive Order “Ill-Conceived, poorly Implemented and Ill-Explained”

A group of ten former senior national security officials filed a joint declaration (Read the PDF here)  with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, saying that President Trump’s Executive Order “does not further – but instead harms – sound U.S. national security and foreign policy.” The document is short and well worth reading in its entirety, but here are the highlights:

  • “Four of us (Haines, Kerry, Monaco and Rice) were current on active intelligence regarding all credible terrorist threat streams directed against the U.S. as recently as one week before the issuance of the Jan. 27, 2017 Executive Order.”
  • “We all are nevertheless unaware of any specific threat that would justify the travel ban established by the Executive Order issued on January 27, 2017. 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.”
  • “There is no national security purpose for a total bar on entry for aliens from the seven named countries. Since September 11, 2001, not a single terrorist attack in the United States has been perpetrated by aliens from the countries named in the Order. Very few attacks on U.S. soil since September 11, 2001 have been traced to foreign nationals at all. The overwhelming majority of attacks have been committed by U.S. citizens.”
  •  “As a national security measure, the Order is unnecessary. National security – based immigration restrictions have consistently been tailored to respond to: (1) specific, credible threats based on individualized information, (2) the best available intelligence and (3) thorough interagency legal and policy review. This Order rests not on such tailored grounds, but rather, on (1) general bans (2) not supported by any new intelligence that the Administration has claimed, or of which we are aware, and (3) not vetted through careful interagency legal and policy review.”
  • “In our professional opinion, the Order was ill-conceived, poorly implemented and ill-explained.”
  • “The Order is of unprecedented scope. We know of no case where a President has invoked his statutory authority to suspend admission for such a broad class of people. Even after 9/11, the U.S. Government did not invoke the provisions of law cited by the Administration to broadly bar entrants based on nationality, national origin, or religious affiliation.”
  • “Maintaining the district court’s temporary restraining order while the underlying legal issues are being adjudicated would not jeopardize national security. It would simply preserve the status quo ante, still requiring that individuals be subjected to all the rigorous legal vetting processes that are currently in place. Reinstating the Executive Order would wreak havoc on innocent lives and deeply held American values.”
  • “Rebranding a proposal first advertised as a “Muslim Ban” as “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States” does not disguise the Order’s discriminatory intent, or make it necessary, effective, or faithful to America’s Constitution, laws, or values.”

The signatories of the declaration are:

  • Madeleine Albright (Ambassador to the United Nations, 1993-1997. Secretary of State, 1997-2001)
  • Avril Haines (CIA Deputy Director, 2013-2015. Deputy National Security Adviser, 2015-2017)
  • Michael Hayden (NSA Director, 1999-2005. CIA Director 2006-2009)
  • John Kerry (Secretary of State, 2013-2017)
  • John McLaughlin (CIA Deputy Director, 2000-2004. Acting CIA Director, 2004)
  • Lisa Monaco (Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, Deputy National Security Adviser 2013-2017)
  • Michael Morrell (Career CIA official since 1980. CIA Deputy Director 2010-2013. Acting CIA Director, 2011, 2012-2013)
  • Janet Napolitano (Secretary of Homeland Security, 2009-2013)
  • Leon Panetta (CIA Director, 2009-2011. Secretary of Defense, 2011-2013)
  • Susan Rice (Ambassador to the United Nations, 2009-2013. National Security Adviser, 2013-2017)

Oregon Governor’s Executive Order Prohibits State Agencies from Participating in Religious Registry

Oregon governor Kate Brown issued an executive order a few days ago instructing executive branch agencies not to target or discriminate against people solely on the basis of their immigration status.

One particularly interesting provision to keep in mind:

5. Non-participation in Religious Registry. No state agency may use moneys, equipment, or personnel to assist in or facilitate the creation of a registry the purpose of which is to identify members of a religious group, except as required by federal or state law.

In other words, the state of Oregon will not participate in any Muslim database or registry.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Refuses to Reinstate Trump Travel Ban

A late night decision (Read the PDF here) from a three-judge panel on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals came down in the early hours of Sunday morning:

Washington (CNN)A federal appeals court early Sunday morning denied the US government’s emergency request to resume President Donald Trump’s travel ban.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has asked for both sides to file legal briefs before the court makes its final decision after a federal judge halted the program on Friday.

What this means is that the ruling by US District Court Judge James Robart, who suspended the ban, will remain in place — for now.

The US Justice Department filed an appeal just after midnight Sunday, asking to pause Robart’s sweeping decision that temporarily halted enforcement of several key provisions of Trump’s executive order.

Lawyers from both sides have until Monday (tomorrow) to make any filings. If the Ninth Circuit upholds Robart’s TRO, expect the Department of Justice to file an appeal with the Supreme Court. If SCOTUS agrees to hear the case with its current 8 justice lineup, that means that if the opinion is a 4-4 partisan split, the Ninth Circuit opinion will stand. If the Supreme Court rules by a 5-3 majority or greater, then its opinion will supersede the Ninth Circuit’s.

Federal Government Revoked 100,000 Visas, DOJ Lawyer Tells Court

In addition to the Temporary Restraining Order issued by a federal judge in Washington, the Trump administration got more bad news out of the Eastern District of Virginia yesterday:

First, Judge Leonie Brinkema (a Clinton appointee to the federal bench) agreed to the Commonwealth of Virginia’s motion to expand the scope of individuals affected by the Trump administration’s executive law to include visa holders, in addition to to green card holders.  According to a statement from Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring’s office, the Commonwealth will argue in favor of a motion for a preliminary injunction at a hearing scheduled for February 10.

Second, Judge Brinkema issued a one-page order (Read the PDF here) requiring the federal government to provide the Commonwealth of Virginia “a list of all persons who have been denied entry to or removed from the United States since the Executive Order entitled ‘Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States’ was signed.” Judge Brinkema’s order applies to anyone who was a Virginia resident on the morning of January 27, 2017, and “had lawful permanent resident status, an immigrant visa (or accompanying family or spousal visa), a valid student visa (or accompanying family or spousal visa), or a valid work visa (or accompanying family or spousal visa) by the close of business on Thursday, February 9,2017.”

Third was the biggest bombshell to come out of yesterday’s hearing, which will likely cause the Trump administration no small amount of political and legal headaches for the foreseeable future. Erez Reuveni, a lawyer in the Justice Department’s Office of Immigration Litigation, told the court, “Over 100,000 visas were revoked on Friday at 6:30 p.m.,” referring to the date the executive order was signed.  According to a Daily Beast reporter who was in the courtroom at the time:

The State Department disputed that figure, saying it was only 60,000 visas that had been revoked. Regardless of which figure is ultimately correct, why is it such a problem for the administration? Again, from Daily Beast’s Betsy Woodruff:

The President himself cited that same 109 figure earlier this week:

In other words, the administration downplayed the impact of the Executive Order, potentially by a magnitude of 1,000.  (That doesn’t mean that 60,000-100,000 people were detained at or deported from various airports, it means that 60,000-100,000 visas were revoked by the federal government as a consequence of the order.)

Expect all the plaintiffs filing lawsuits against the administration across the country to use that 100,000 visas figure in court and in every filing that will come up in the days and weeks ahead.

Federal Judge Issues Temporary Restraining Order Halting Trump Executive Order

Judge James L. Robart issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) blocking the nationwide implementation of President Trump’s executive order on immigration, handing Trump’s opponents an early legal victory in the litigation surrounding the controversial order.

The TRO will remain in place while Robart considers Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson’s lawsuit against the administration, which challenges several provisions of the executive order. (Read the PDF document here) One key excerpt:

The court finds that the States have met their burden of demonstrating that they face immediate and irreparable injury as a result of the signing and implementation of the Executive Order. The Executive Order affects the States’ residents in areas of employment, education, business, family relations, and freedom to travel. These harms extend to the States by virtue of their roles as parens patriae of the residents living within their borders. In addition, the States themselves are harmed by virtue of the damage that implementation of the Executive Order has inflicted upon the operations and missions of their public universities and other institutions of higher learning, as well as injury to the States’ operations, tax bases, and public funds. These harms are significant and ongoing. Accordingly, the court concludes that a TRO against Federal Defendants is necessary until such time as the court can hear and decide the States’ request for a preliminary injunction.

The White House reaction:

The President’s reaction:

Keith Ellison Picks Up Endorsements in DNC Race

Keith Ellison rolled out several big endorsements over the last few days leading up to today’s DNC Forum in Detroit.

Former Vice President Walter Mondale (who, like Ellison, is also from Minnesota):

“I’m pleased to support Keith Ellison, a fellow Minnesotan, as the next Chair of the Democratic National Committee. Keith was a Minnesota star in the state legislature and now in the U.S. House. Keith believes that we need to help all Americans succeed, and this message of inclusiveness is one that has resonated with people in the 5th Congressional District in Minnesota, who have re-elected Keith five times and who have turned out to vote in increasing numbers ever since Keith took office. Keith is exactly the type of person our Party needs right now, and I know he’d use his talents to elect Democrats across our country if he’s the next DNC Chair.”

Rep. John Lewis:

I ask you to join me in supporting my colleague and dear friend, Keith Ellison, for DNC Chair. Keith’s long history as an organizer who can energize the grassroots makes him the best choice to lead our party during this critical time. He knows that sometimes you have to have good trouble. You have to get in the way and raise your voice. But protest must be channeled into electoral and legislative success. Keith’s record standing with the grassroots means he is a trusted partner to harness this protest energy into rebuilding the Democratic Party.

The Teamsters (Worth noting that the Teamsters endorsed Ellison and not the most recent former Labor Secretary Tom Perez):

Today, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters endorsed Rep. Keith Ellison to lead the Democratic National Committee. Rep. Ellison is a strong voice for working families and labor.

“It is time for the Democratic Party to get back to its roots and focus on the issues that matter most to workers – jobs, health care and retirement security. Rep. Ellison is a proven organizer who knows that these battles are won in the field, not the corridors of Washington.

The Nation: one of the oldest liberal/progressive publications in the United States.

The right response to this crisis is a retooling of the Democratic National Committee to align it more closely with movements for social and economic justice. The party must make the inside/outside connection that will strengthen immediate resistance to the Trump regime, while improving the long-term electoral prospects of Democrats. Keith Ellison, co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, is prepared to do just that. In an impressive field of contenders for the position of DNC chair—including party leaders that The Nation has often praised, like former labor secretary Tom Perez, as well as energetic newcomers like Pete Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Indiana—it is Ellison who combines the ideals, skills, and movement connections that will revitalize the party.

Former DNC Chair Endorses Pete Buttigieg

Former Democratic National Committee chairman Steve Grossman has endorsed South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg to be the next chairman of the DNC, according to NBC News. In a letter sent out to DNC members – who will elect the party’s next chairman and senior leadership at the end of February – Grossman wrote that Buttigieg could, “transform the DNC through the power of his ideas and his ability to execute an ambitious plan.”

This is Buttigieg’s first big endorsement in the race, though only two other former chairs (Terry McAuliffe and Donnie Fowler) have endorsed candidates in this race (Tom Perez and Jaime Harrison).

Minnesota Joins Washington Lawsuit Against Trump Administration, Hearing Set for Friday

Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson filed an amended complaint to his state’s original lawsuit against the Trump administration, which adds Minnesota – and its attorney general, Lori Swanson – as plaintiffs.

Swanson said in a statement, “It does not pass constitutional muster, is inconsistent with our history as a nation, and undermines our national security… America can keep its people safe without sacrificing bedrock constitutional principles.”

There will be a hearing at a federal court in Seattle tomorrow (Friday) for lawyers representing Washington and the federal government. At issue will be whether or not the federal government should suspend implementation of the administration’s executive order nationwide immediately.  A ruling from Judge James Robart (a George W. Bush appointee) could come as early as 2:30 p.m. Pacific Standard Time.

Biden Endorses Tom Perez for DNC Chair

Multiple news organizations are reporting that former vice president Joe Biden has endorsed Tom Perez for DNC chairman. The Perez campaign has not yet sent out an announcement or posted it on social media.  According to the Daily Beast, Perez was telling DNC members gathered in Houston last weekend that he had locked down Biden’s support:

Since as recently as last week, Perez had been telling DNC members that he had secured Biden’s endorsement. At the site of last weekend’s DNC forum in Houston, Texas, Perez was discussing the future of the Democratic Party with a private gathering of DNC members. According to two sources familiar with the exchanges, Perez excitedly said, in an apparent effort to drum up more support from DNC members, that the former vice president had his back. “And that’s why Joe Biden is coming out for me next week,” one DNC member recalled Perez saying.

UPDATE: Here’s the tweet from Tom Perez

Biden Foundation Launches

Twelve days after leaving office, former vice president Joe Biden announced the launch of the Biden Foundation. According to the foundation’s website, it will “build upon Vice President and Dr. Biden’s lifelong commitment to protect and advance the rights and opportunities of all people through educational programming and public policy analysis.”

The statement from Vice President and Dr. Jill Biden:

Wilmington, DE – My dad used to have an expression: “It’s a lucky person who gets up in the morning, puts both feet on the floor, knows what they’re about to do and thinks it still matters.” Jill and I have been very lucky these past decades.  We look forward to this new chapter where we will continue our work to ensure that everyone—no matter their income level, race, gender, age, or sexuality— is treated with dignity and gets a fair shot at achieving the American Dream. That’s why we are honored that a group of long-time friends and supporters have begun the work of founding the Biden Foundation to build on our lifelong commitment to issues that have always motivated us.

The foundation’s work will focus on foreign policy, cancer research, and ending violence against women, and other issues.

One interesting point on the Biden Foundation website: it will not accept donations from foreign citizens, organizations or countries. This is presumably a response to the fundraising practices of the Clinton Foundation which caused so much controversy during Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.