Further update, November 22:

The Hill reports on 11/22 that Trump is now threatening to close down "the whole border" with Mexico because immigration is now "out of control". The only thing that is out of control is Trump's lust for absolute authoritarian power, using immigration as a pretext. This Thanksgiving is a dangerous time for America and our democracy.


Update, November 22:

On November 21, Chief Justice Roberts issued a scathing denunciation of Trump's latest personal attack in a federal judge, Judge Tigar, for opposing Trump's bigoted and authoritarian anti-immigrant agenda. By defending the principle of independence of the judiciary from presidential control, Roberts is also defending our democracy, which is also under assault from Trump's claim to be an emperor in all matters related to immigration rather than the leader of a democracy. See, Wahington Post, November 21:



Rebuking Trump's criticism of 'Obama judge,' Chief Justice Roberts defends judiciary as 'independent'

My original comment follows:



Reuters and many other media are now reporting that a Federal District Judge in San Francisco, Jon Tigar, in effect celebrated the reals spirit of Thanksgiving, i.e. freedom from one-man tyranny, by issuing a temporary nationwide injunction on November 19 against Trump's November 9 "proclamation" denying the right of asylum in the US to anyone who entered the US at an unauthorized crossing point, on the grounds that the proclamation is in direct violation of US asylum law See Reuters, November 20:


Asylum case judge to DOJ: The president can't override immigration law

As the above article explains, the ACLU, Southern Poverty Law Center and Center for Constitutional Rights,brought an action to challenge Trump's November 9 proclamation denying the right to asylum to anyone who entered the US an an unauthorized border crossing point, in direct violation of a section of the INA that makes anyone who is present in the US and meets certain criteria eligible for asylum regardless of whether the person entered the US legally or not.

In his attempt to nullify the clearly expressed intent of Congress to permit both people who entered legally and people who entered by other means to apply for asylum in the United States, Trump relied on the broad powers to ban certain classes of immigrants from entering the US granted in INA Section 212 (f), and upheld by the Supreme Court in the Muslim Ban case, Trump v. Hawaii.

But Judge Tigar ruled that nothing in Section 212(f) gives the president the power to override America's laws concerning the right to asylum.on his decision in the above case (East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Trump) Judge Tigar rejected the administration's claim of absolute presidential power to bar entry into the US by foreign citizens for any reason whatsoever by pointing out that Section 212(f) deals with admissibility to the US, not with asylum.

He added, quoting from the Supreme Court's Trump v. Hawaii decision itself:

"No court has ever held that [INA Section 212(f)] allows the president to expressly override particular provisions of the INA."

The principle at issue in this case goes far beyond the question whether several thousand members of a migrant "caravan" which Trump has demonized as allegedly including criminals and terrorists without the slightest evidence will be allowed to apply for asylum in the US, just as the issue at stake in the Muslim ban litigation went far beyond the question of whether citizens of a handful of Muslim countries would be allowed to apply for visas to the US. The real issue is whether Congtrss makes the immigration laws of the United States of America, or whether Donald Trump ,makes them by presidential decree.

In the latter case, what would stop Trump or some future president from making all the laws of America on his own instead of going through Congress? Then, America would no longer be a democracy and there would be nothing to celebrate at Thanksgiving.

And that would be a real turkey.

Roger Algase
Attorney at Law