Update as of 1:09 pm. January 30:

POLITICO reports that widespread complaints that DHS is refusing to comply with federal court orders prohibiting deportation of immigrants from 7 Muslim countries detained under Trump's January 27 order and requiring DHS to permit detainees to have access to lawyers are continuing.


Meanwhile, in a development that could be very ominous for the future of all immigration in America, Stephen Bannon, editor of the fiercely nationalist, anti-immigrant Breitbart News, has been promoted to a permanent position on the National Security Council, outranking military and civilian national security experts. POLITICO reports that he is already having great influence in the Trump administration.


This is especially unsettling in view of Breitbart News' open assault against the 1965 immigration reform law which has been the foundation of our modern immigration system for the past half century and which abolished the racial "national origin" quotas of the 1924 Johnson-Reed immigration act. A link to the Breitbart News article appears below.

Update, 10:52 am, January 30:

In the light of Donald Trump's January 27 executive order barring immigrants from seven Muslim countries, and refugees from all over the world from coming to the US, I am starting to get messages from people who are already in the United States with legal visas, who do not belong to the Muslim faith, and who are from countries far away from the Middle Eastern and African ones covered by Trump's order, asking whether they will have any immigration future in the United States.

They may be getting the real message of Trump's January 27 decree much more clearly than some of our immigration experts, who may be more prone to let themselves be distracted by the cynical but bogus "national security" window dressing for the order (see below) or the fact that it is only "temporary" (in all likelihood, for as long as Donald Trump is president, that is).

I doubt very much that I am the only lawyer practicing in the immigration field who will be receiving such questions in the days, weeks and months to come.

The following comment has been revised and updated as of January 30 as of 9:57 am.

The Department of Homeland Security, evidently overruling White House adviser Steve Bannon (see below) has issued a statement to the effect that green card holders from the seven affected Muslim countries who are already in transit will be allowed into the United States on the grounds that doing so is in the US "National Interest".

This is a small, but welcome step backward from Trump's January 27 decree banning innocent people from coming to the US merely because they are from certain Muslim countries, just as all but a few Jewish immigrants were banned from America in the 1930's.

The January 27 order, issued by presidential diktat and, according to most reports, without any consultation with Congressional or agency leaders, and based on Trumped-up "national security" grounds that few people outside outside Trump'a circle of diehard anti-Muslim zealots will take seriously, and which national security experts are now attacking as "immoral", "stupid" and "counterproductive" see:


has created fear in Muslim and other non-white immigrant communities, and caused demonstrations of outrage among US citizens at airports coast to coast.

For a link to the full text of the order, which also bars refugees from all over the world, see:


The January 27 edict has also created fears that the ban may only be a first step toward undoing the principle of accepting qualified immigrants from all over the world that was enshrined in the 1965 immigration reform law, a law which is now under attack by some of Trump's closest advisers on immigration.

Trump himself has called for bringing more immigrants from Europe, as opposed to the rest of the world, where he is relying on advisers who want sharp reductions in immigration for every category.


These advisers include Senator and Attorney General Designate Jeff Sessions and Breitbart News editor Stephen Bannon, both of whom have provided open support for turning America back to the spirit of the infamous 1924 Johnson-Reed immigration act, Tbat law, using the same kind of "national origins" mechanisms that underlie Trump's January 27 edict against immigrants from certain Muslim nations, barred Eastern European Jews, Southern European Catholics, and virtually all Middle Easterners, Asians and Africans from immigrating to the US.

Regarding Sessions' support for taking America back almost 100 years to the time of this "Nordics" only, white supremacist law, see:


Bannon's Breitbart News strongly attacked the 1965 immigration reform law, which abolished the odious racial "national origin" quotas of the 1924 law, in the following article supporting Hungary's authoritarian anti-immigrant policies by former Representative Tom Tancredo (R-Colorado) a long time immigration opponent:


There can be no doubt that detaining hundreds of Muslim immigrants at airports around the United States, and deporting some of them even though they had valid visas or green cards (until deportations were blocked nationwide by a federal judge late in the evening of January 28), while denying detainees the right to meet with lawyers despite an order from another federal judge


were not only aimed at the immigrants themselves, but were intended to humiliate and undermine the legitimacy of all Muslims in the US, American citizens included, just as Trump's Wall is meant to do with Mexicans and Mexican-Americans.

Moreover, Trump's January 27 order, based on the assumption that immigrants are detrimental to the interests of the United, not because of anything in their own personal histories or qualifications, but solely because their national origin or religious beliefs, would take America back almost 100 years to the time of the 1924 immigration act mentioned above.

Because of the virulence and intensity of the hatred against Muslims that Donald Trump is exploiting, as detailed in a report by the Southern Poverty Law Center,


registration of Muslim American citizens, surveillance of their places of worship and, possibly even Japanese-American style Muslim "relocation", may not be far down the road.

As shown by the following CNN report, not only the spirit of Trump's January 24 decree, but the way it was implemented, at least until the federal courts began to intervene, are more consistent with procedures in an authoritarian society than those of a democracy.


At the very least, Trump's January 27 order is a clear message to both American and foreign citizen Muslims that they are no longer welcome in America.

Many immigrants will also take this as a message, in keeping with ideology associated with two of Trump's top advisers who have been actively involved with the January 27 ban on immigrants from seven Muslim countries and refugees from all over the world, Breitbart News editor Stephen Bannon and Stephen Miller, former aide to Senator Jeff Sessions, that immigrants from anywhere outside Europe, regardless of religion, are no longer accepted in America.


In addition, because of the authoritarian way that the January 27 order was issued and enforced, and the virtually unlimited claim of one-man power over immigration that Trump is putting forth based on INA Section 212(f), Americans of all backgrounds should be concerned about whether Trump's January 27 edict could be the prelude to the loss of freedom for all of us, not just Muslim immigrants and Muslim-Americans.

In a forthcoming comment on this topic, I will look at the language of the January 27 order itself in order to show why it is so contrary to the spirit of the immigration laws we have had in America during the past half century, and why it is raising so much concern about a return to the 1924 racial immigration quotas which Aldolf Hitler claimed to draw inspiration from.


My next comment will also look at the legal arguments which were raised by the ACLU in its lawsuit in the federal District Court for the Eastern District of New York against implementation of the January 27 order, resulting in the court-ordered preliminary injunction against deporting any of the detained immigrants. In addition it will examine whether there are any legal limits on the president's power to bar immigrants from entering the US under Section 212(f).

Roger Algase
Attorney at Law