The same US District Court Judge, James Robart in Seattle, whom Trump attacked personally as a "so-called judge" for striking down Trump's first Muslim Ban order earlier this year has now issued a decision invalidating, at least in part, Trump's ban against Muslim refugees as contrary to rights granted to refugees to have their applications to enter the United States processed and decided according to law, as provided in the INA and in the Refugee Act of 1980.

A detailed discussion of the legal issues involved is contained in the Court's 65 page decision, which can be accessed through a link provided in the following December 23 POLITICO news report about the case.

To summarize, the District Court concluded that by suspending processing of refugee applications for the specified classes of refugees, most of whom are from Muslim countries, without presenting any compelling of justifiable national security reason for doing so, the Trump administration violated rights to have their applications for admission properly considered which had been guaranteed to them by statute. See:

The above news report also quotes the following statements about the decisions by representatives of two of plaintiffs in the above case.

Mariko Hirose, speaking for plaintiff International Refugee Assistance Project (IRAP), said:

"This administration has attacked refugee resettlement since the first issuance of the Muslim ban, leaving vulnerable refugees left in limbo. This ruling brings relief to thousands of refugees in precarious situations in the Middle East and Africa who are trying to reunite with their spouses and children."

And Rabbi Will Berkovitz of plaintiff Jewish Family Services stated:

"We are thrilled that families will have the chance to be reunited and refugees who have suffered so much will have the chance to make it to safety. As we celebrate this moment, we remember our ancestors who did not have anyone standing with them or for them."

All of us know well exactly which ancestors the Rabbi was referring to when he defended the legal rights of the mainly Muslim refugees whom Trump is fighting so hard to stop from joining their families in the United States because of their nationalities and their religion, just as Jewish refugees trying to escape Hitler were once barred from finding safety in America for the same reasons.

In the coming year, we can expect that there will be many more legal and policy clashes between Americans who believe in upholding the rule of law and the principles of racial justice and equality in immigration policy which have been at the heart of our immigration laws for the past half century on the one hand, and a president who seems to be interested only in barring as many immigrants as possible from non-white parts of the world and removing as many such immigrants as possible who are already here from the United States, using as many pretexts and excuses as he and his white supremacist supporters can invent, on the other.

A Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all readers.

Roger Algase
Attorney at Law