True, but does Congress need to pass a law? Heck, if it’s a law, I’d not be concerned about what Trump said at all. But I was under the impression there was a lot of latitude here by the executive branch.
The only legal and workable way to implement such a ban would be to ban visas to certain countries judged to be hotbeds of extremism. But there’d be no way to ban European Muslims. Such a ban would have barred pretty much all of the culprits who have ever committed major terrorist attacks on the US if it had been longstanding US policy. Tim McVeigh excepted.
Easy to get around that. Relatives of American citizens could get waivers. Plus I doubt Trump would be looking at a total Muslim ban, just a ban from countries that are hotbeds of extremism. Malaysia hasn’t been connected to international terrorism. Pakistan, of course, has.
And we have a winner.
Even Muslim citizens?
Sure. I did a quick look at terrorist attacks by Muslims in the US, and all of them came from majority Muslim countries and they all came over on work or student visas, or as asylum cases, rather than having family members here. Of course, the sample size is small, but it does appear that Muslims who are well established here as good citizens don’t bring over violent relatives
Hey, let’s keep in mind that this measure will on be in place until “we figure out what’s going on”. That shouldn’t take long…
Cite?
Yet a ban on their entering the US is not unconstitutional.
THe Tsarnaevs came over as asylum cases. The 9/11 hijackers were all work and student visas. The WTC bombers were the same, except for one of them, who was born in the US but lived most of his live in Iraq. We can’t outright ban American citizens from returning home, but we can require those who have spent their lives in the Muslim world to submit to a thorough background check. Yasin was trained in bombmaking and had scars from the experience. Under the policy I suggested, that would probably be detected.
There is another one, Zacarias Massoui(I’m sure the spelling is wrong), who was born in France, but if we just do some cursory background checks on all immigrants, period, we’d have found out that he’d attended an extremist mosque in Britain and denied him a visa. If countries can threaten to deny Ann Coulter visas because of the things she says, we can certainly deny religious fanatics from extremists mosques.
As with Trump’s immigration proposals, practicality isn’t actually as much of an issue as critics make out. The real issue is morality. Arguing about practicality distracts from the central issue of what kind of country we want to be. I’m not endorsing the liberal view either that we should take in as many Syrian refugees as possible, but I do think we should be better about background checks. It’s always amazing after the fact how most of these terrorists had an extremely suspicious travel itinerary. Sorry, but if someone applies for asylum here and they just happen to have spent a lot of time where there are terrorist training camps, they need to knock on a different door. Germany’s open for those types I hear.
The Tsarnev brothers were 11 and 15. 9 years before the attack. The parents were not radicals.
13 Terror Attacks Linked to Radical Islam That Struck America Since 9/11
I went through the list. Every single one was either a natural born citizen of the U.S. or came here at an early age.
Show me a list of attacks since 9/11 that were committed by recent immigrants who are of adult ( or near adult, say 15 and up) age.
Oops.11 years before the bombings.
No, this is the** Shia** view. The Sunni view is narrow and is not much different than the Jewish view on this same concept of preservation of life as acceptable- in the Sunnah it is the same idea as allowing one to eat porc instead of starving.
You westerners talk more about this concept than is ever actually ever discussed by actual live Muslims…
(of course the hateful innovations of the Takfiri, I am sure they would find ways to rationalize adopting the shia concept like they adopted suicice bombings - so it indeed would be pointless)
If the US passed a law that said that US famine relief aid could only go to Christians that would be struck down.
The fact that the law applies to people overseas is irrelevant.
The law was passed by Americans officials in America. So the courts have jurisdiction over that.
Ditto any Trump anti-Muslim rule.
And even more attacks were commited by white conservative Christians. Killing someone because you think they are muslim, bombing an abortion clinic or shooting people at church are all examples of terrorism.
But they did come from a majority Muslim country that is connected to radicalism(in a huge way), and did not come over becuase they had family here, so they wouldn’t have been allowed here under Trump’s ban.
So we’ve had 100s of 1000s of refugees and two become radicalized after 11 years. What do you plan to do about all the natural born U.S. citizens who are Muslim?
Throw 'em out? Confined to camps in the desert? Jail?
None of those have been able to mount attacks that your average PCP-induced thug couldn’t pull off. I’m not concerned about those, I’m concerned about mass casualty events by trained operatives.
Name some that have occurred in this country.
And put those goalposts back where you found 'em.