Immigrant order trumped by court

Donald Trump’s executive order that put an immediate stop to immigrants and others entering the country even though they were already in transit caused an uproar, then a judge put a temporary halt to it.

Fox News: Federal judge grants stay to allow those with visas to remain, 10 still detained at JFK

A federal judge in Brooklyn, New York issued an emergency stay Saturday night that temporarily blocks the U.S. government from sending people out of the country after they have landed at a U.S. airport with valid visas.

The order barred U.S. border agents from removing anyone who arrived in the U.S. with a valid visa from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen. It also covered anyone with an approved refugee application. The Department of Homeland Security said that more than 170 people were denied entry to the U.S. as of Saturday night, according to Reuters.

The ruling by Judge Ann Donnelly of the U.S. District Courtfor the Eastern District of New York came during a hearing called after President Donald Trump issued an executive order blocking people from seven Muslim-majority from entering the United States and putting a temporary halt to refugee admissions

Twelve refugees were detained at JFK Airport within hours of Trump’s order restricting immigration from seven majority-Muslim nations — but two were released later in the day — as hundreds of protesters continued to amass at the busy airport throughout the day and into the evening.

Hameed Khalid Darweesh, an Army interpreter in Iraq, had been stopped as he traveled with his wife and three kids when agents pulled him aside, according to the New York Times.

Earlier from Politico: GOP splits on Trump immigration order

Congressional Republicans splintered Saturday over President Donald Trump’s executive order temporarily barring immigrants from seven Muslim-majority nations, with several GOP lawmakers chastising it as overly broad even as Speaker Paul Ryan and committee leaders defended it as a necessary measure for national security.

Yet most Republicans, especially those on Capitol Hill, have kept silent, declining to publicly comment on a hugely controversial move based on a concept from Trump that many party leaders had harshly criticized when he first raised it during the presidential campaign.

Sounds messy but not surprising given the haste the Trump administration has pushed this and other orders through and their apparent lack of adequate consultation.

 

Leave a comment

61 Comments

  1. Alan Wilkinson

     /  29th January 2017

    To be accurate as I understand it, the judge has tweaked a minor detail of the implementation of the order affecting those in transit at the time the order was made only.

    Your heading exaggerates.

    Reply
    • Anonymous Coward

       /  29th January 2017

      Again Al, you can’t tweak a non existent detail. Weasel words.

      Reply
      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  29th January 2017

        Obviously the detail existed as someone invented and implemented it. We don’t know who and with what direction and authority.

        Reply
        • Anonymous Coward

           /  29th January 2017

          The fact that people were flying into the country as it became active says otherwise.

          Reply
          • Anonymous Coward

             /  29th January 2017

            Check out the article I’ve put in open forum, it’s far more interesting.

            Reply
          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  29th January 2017

            No it doesn’t

            Reply
            • Anonymous Coward

               /  29th January 2017

              Yes it does, implemented properly, there would be a rollout period so that no one was caught in transit.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  29th January 2017

              That is effectively what the court has ordered. You couldn’t have a staged rollout with this because you would just generate a flood of folk beating the implementation date.

            • Anonymous Coward

               /  29th January 2017

              A rollout in this case would have been as simple as identifying the planes that would be in the air when the edict became active and stop people from getting on those planes. Totally do-able, and embarrassing for Trump that they lacked just that simple bit of foresight.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  29th January 2017

              In one day the US has 80,000 flights. Many of those will be international. Finding the handful of people affected would be a needle in a haystack and mean many thousands of people needing to be told in advance of a major policy announcement. Not doable.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  29th January 2017

              I bet most of them ended up on FB, AC. I think the relative numbers give a pretty good indication of social media activity.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  29th January 2017

              Oops, posted above in the wrong place. Belongs below in response to Facebook memes discussion.

          • Conspiratoor

             /  29th January 2017

            Argue about the legal niceties if you must. But Trump is going about delivering his campaign promises with a messianic zeal

            Predictably we are hearing much from the liberal elite and old media but I’ll wager the folks that put him there to do a job will be thinking ‘go you good thing’

            What we are seeing is a radical departure from the empty political rhetoric we’ve become accustomed to from our own gutless wonders. When was the last time a kiwi politician put his balls on the line and followed through on the hard stuff. To whit criminal gangs running amok in Whakatane, ho hum just another day in the office

            Reply
            • Anonymous Coward

               /  29th January 2017
            • Conspiratoor

               /  29th January 2017

              All good fun ac but do you think there’s a chance you’ve been suckered old son?

            • Anonymous Coward

               /  29th January 2017

              By whom? Did you read that article, that’s some freaky shit, turn out those Macedonian boys could well have been a fabrication, all that facebook shit was coming from Trumps people. They made 175 000 memes for crying out loud.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  29th January 2017

              That’s slightly more than patu and Klik Bait. But how many did Clinton’s folk make?

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  29th January 2017

              I think we have an answer. It doesn’t work for you, AC:

              About 1,580,000 results (0.48 seconds)
              Search Results
              Images for clinton meme

              About 20,000,000 results (0.45 seconds)
              Search Results
              Images for trump meme

            • Conspiratoor

               /  29th January 2017

              Yes ac, people who like “curly fries” on Facebook do tend to be more intelligent

              I did read it but I repeat, please provide proof Trump acknowledges your claims he paid these guys and they played any part in his election win

              By the way just curious ac, what are your views on UFOs?

            • Anonymous Coward

               /  29th January 2017

              The proof was in the article. Why would you equate it with a UFO story?, what do you find hard to believe?. That analytics work? That Trump hired some?

            • Anonymous Coward

               /  29th January 2017

              Those searches don’t bring up the facebook memes Al, those numbers are meaningless.

            • Conspiratoor

               /  29th January 2017

              You were happy to promulgate the claim below on another thread ac. Up to you to back it up. Or we consign it to the realms of UFO sightings…

              “The Story of haw a company called Cambridge Analytica. took a psychometric researchers system for analysing facebook data to ascertain personality types and commercialised it and sold it to Nigel Farage and Donald Trump”

            • Anonymous Coward

               /  29th January 2017

              Just read it FFS. I provided the link,

            • Conspiratoor

               /  29th January 2017

              I have FFS, a link without proof. Not the first time you’ve pulled this stunt and probably won’t be the last

            • Anonymous Coward

               /  29th January 2017

              But if you don’t believe that psychometrics and big data combined can’t identify personality traits, then you probably won’t believe anything.

            • Conspiratoor

               /  29th January 2017

              I’m not saying big data didn’t have a role in the election result. I was calling you out on your claim that Trump paid Cambridge Analytica to provide it although I have to say this is a great read …if only it were true

              “At a little past 9:30 p.m. Tuesday, the head of a little-known data analytics team working for Donald Trump in San Antonio sent a flurry of messages to the campaign’s New York war room”

            • Anonymous Coward

               /  29th January 2017

              I was able to find lots of stories saying they’d been hired. Steve Bannon is on the board. They’re negotiating a White House role.
              What’s not to believe?

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  29th January 2017

        Some minor detail. This isn’t like the liquor one when a clumsily worded sentence made it illegal here to carry alcohol in public-even from the supermarket to the car- and had to be hastily reworded. This is Trump channeling Hitler-and being called to account for it.

        Reply
        • Anonymous Coward

           /  29th January 2017

          Reply
        • Kitty Catkin

           /  29th January 2017

          Not at all. I know enough about Hitler not to use his name lightly. Trump is a born dictator. The difference is that enough people disagree with him to make a difference possible.

          You are the only person who’s nasty when someone agrees with you. You’d pick a quarrel with a lamp post, as the old saying goes.

          Reply
          • Anonymous Coward

             /  29th January 2017

            Look up Godwin’s Law. Actually I know you won’t so here it is.

            “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Hitler approaches 1”

            Reply
            • Kitty Catkin

               /  29th January 2017

              Yes, I do know what it is, it has been raised on YNZ before.

          • Anonymous Coward

             /  29th January 2017

            I wasn’t being nasty, just pointing out you’d invoked Godwin.

            Reply
    • Joe Bloggs

       /  29th January 2017

      Weirdness alert….Alan’s channeling Kellyanne Conway and Sean Spicer again. Alternative truth anyone?

      Reply
  2. artcroft

     /  29th January 2017

    Be interesting to know what Kiwi WH adviser Chris Liddell makes of all this.

    Reply
    • Kitty Catkin

       /  29th January 2017

      He’s probably thinking that there has to be an easier way to earn a crust.

      Reply
  3. lurcher1948

     /  29th January 2017

    How can you trust someone who is coloured ORANGE…is it from planet earth.

    Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  29th January 2017

      Time for some rose-coloured glasses, Lurch.

      Reply
      • Kitty Catkin

         /  29th January 2017

        Pink and orange….how horrid.

        The tech cos are protesting-many of their staff are immigrants, many Muslim-and Google has sent out emails to its Muslim staff advising them not to travel.

        Own goal, Trump.

        Reply
        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  29th January 2017

          It will settle down, Kitty. Early days.

          Reply
          • Kitty Catkin

             /  30th January 2017

            The beginning of the persecution that ended up sending 6,000,000 Jews and who knows how many Gypsies, gays and communists to their deaths, I mean.

            Reply
          • Kitty Catkin

             /  30th January 2017

            There are fairies at the bottom of MY garden !

            Reply
  4. patupaiarehe

     /  29th January 2017

    It would almost be funny, if it wasn’t actually happening. ‘DOTUS’ issues an ‘executive order’, nek minnit, some cheeky unelected judge overturns it…

    Reply
    • patupaiarehe

       /  29th January 2017

      I really don’t understand what he (DOTUS) was hoping to achieve, other than pissing a lot of people off, just because he can. Not the best ‘foreign policy’, at all, IMHO. He will ‘reap what he has sown’, & it won’t work out well for anybody…

      Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  29th January 2017

      Judge didn’t overturn it. He just said it can’t be applied to people who have arrived in the US with a valid visa. Sensible.

      Reply
      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  29th January 2017

        Actually she not he I think.

        Reply
        • patupaiarehe

           /  29th January 2017

          Whoever it was Alan, I find it rather entertaining (that is probably the wrong word to use), that an ‘executive order’ can be challenged by a judge. I don’t think it’s a bad thing either…

          Reply
          • Anonymous Coward

             /  29th January 2017

            Checks and Balances.

            Reply
          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  29th January 2017

            It’s good. Sensible decision as I said. I have no idea why the bureaucrats couldn’t have made it themselves.

            Reply
            • patupaiarehe

               /  29th January 2017

              I suspect Alan, you might agree that bureaucrats aren’t renowned for making wise choices… 😉

            • Anonymous Coward

               /  29th January 2017

              They weren’t given the chance.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  29th January 2017

              We don’t know.

            • Gezza

               /  29th January 2017

              Well it’s not usually bureaucrats that implement these sorts of changes.
              Its small project teams with tight deadlines & good knowledge of the business.

            • patupaiarehe

               /  29th January 2017

              @ G
              I suspect that any team assembled, on such short notice, would be less than optimal…

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  29th January 2017

              CNN is saying it was a small team with tight deadlines and without good knowledge of the business. I wonder if there will be some fallout within the Trump team for a couple of these stuff ups.

            • Gezza

               /  29th January 2017

              Somehow I don’t think so. The best people learn quickly from precisely this sort of situation, & they learn the key people to consult next time that that they didn’t last time.

            • patupaiarehe

               /  29th January 2017

              CNN said that? I guess it must be true then… 😛

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  29th January 2017

              The first insight I’ve seen, patu. Take it with caution until more evidence is available. It’s a definite maybe.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s