Court Hears Arguments Over Trump’s Muslim Ban; 45’s Documented Bigotry, Xenophobia Play Key Factor

Getty Images
Getty Images

Arguments for and against President Donald Trump’s immigration ban were heard Tuesday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, based in San Francisco. The U.S. Justice Department and the state of Washington, which became the first state to file a lawsuit against the Trump administration over the ban, called in via conference call, according to the New York Times.


The Times’ Eric Lichtblau reports:

Two of the justices who will be hearing the arguments were appointed by a Democrat, and the third was named by a Republican. Circuit Judge Michelle T. Friedland, who sits in San Jose and is presiding over the hearing, was appointed by President Barack Obama, Senior Circuit Judge William C. Canby, Jr., in Phoenix, was appointed by President Jimmy Carter, and Senior Circuit Judge Richard R. Clifton in Honolulu, was appointed by President George W. Bush.

Trump has repeatedly made discriminatory remarks about Muslims and has spent a great deal of time fearmongering and raising the specter of “radical Islamic terrorism” to stoke Islamophobia in the country.

The seven countries listed under Trump’s ban are Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. The United States is currently bombing Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, Libya and Syria.

You do the math.


In January, Rudy Giuliani, former mayor of New York City and Trump groupie, bragged that 45 asked him for advice on how to be a bigot legally. The Hill reports:

“I’ll tell you the whole history of it: When he first announced it, he said ‘Muslim ban,’” Giuliani said on Fox News.

“He called me up, he said, ‘Put a commission together, show me the right way to do it legally.’”

Giuliani said he then put together a commission that included lawmakers and expert lawyers.

“And what we did was we focused on, instead of religion, danger,” Giuliani said.

“The areas of the world that create danger for us, which is a factual basis, not a religious basis. Perfectly legal, perfectly sensible.”

Giuliani reiterated that the ban is “not based on religion.”

“It’s based on places where there are substantial evidence that people are sending terrorists into our country,” he said.


Interestingly enough, while Trump has claimed that his ban is to “keep the U.S. safe” in a post 9/11 world, there has been no ban on Saudi Arabia even though 15 of the 9/11 hijackers were from there, two were from the United Arab Emirates, one was from Lebanon and one was from Egypt.

There has been no ban placed on any of those countries; nor has there been a ban placed on white male radical Christians, who are the biggest and most violent threat to public safety in the United States.


The live stream of the court proceedings has concluded. Listen to the audio below.


Read more at the New York Times and The Hill.

Mother. Wife. Writer. Journalist. Bubber's Daughter.


Not Enough Day Drinking

To the dumb asses in the greys who I’m not going to elevate: Your Fuhrer calls it a ban. Tell the guy who signed it that he’s wrong and he shouldn’t call a thing what it is.