Bizarre, Constitutional Law, International, Politics, Religion

Trump Calls For “Total and Complete Shutdown” of Muslims Entering The United States

495px-Donald_Trump_by_Gage_SkidmoreIn a truly shocking and facially unconstitutional plan, Republican Presidential Candidate Donald Trump is calling for a “total and complete shutdown” of Muslims entering the United States. The plan would violate a host of domestic and international protections, as I discussed today with the Washington Post.


Trump stated that “[i]t is obvious to anybody the hatred [among Muslims] is beyond comprehension. Where this hatred comes from and why, we will have to determine. Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in Jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life.”

Trump said he would ease the ban in the case of Muslims serving in the U.S. military and allow them to return home. that is still well short of constitutional — or rational — plan. For Muslim citizens, such a plan would be grossly unconstitutional under the first and fifth amendments. The latter prohibits The depriving of individuals of “life, liberty, or property,” without due process of the law and an implicit guarantee of equal protection of the laws.

It is certainly true that the constitutional protections often turn on whether someone is consider a “person” under the United States Constitution. In Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982), the Supreme Court struck down a Texas statute denying funding for education to unauthorized immigrant children. Being present within the United States does afford protections of due process and equal protection. Outside of the country immigrants without resident status face a more difficult challenge. However, international law and conventions afford protections for travel and religion.

The law would harken back to the disgraceful period of the Chinese Exclusion laws. We have long rejected immigration limits based discriminatory classes of this kind. Indeed, the Immigration and Nationality Act protects potential refugees facing “fear of persecution” on account of their “religion.” Yet under President Trump we would now formally impose such a discriminatory element, a move that would make the United States a pariah around the world and immediately extinguish our relations with Islamic countries.

Immigration policy has cleared resonated as a draw for Trump. However, this proposal would openly embrace raw prejudice and blind rage as motivating factors for governmental policy. It would clearly fail in denying reentry for citizens or residents. As for non-citizens abroad, they are accorded protections under international law. Under Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, people have the right to leave or enter a country and that “everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.” There is no doubt murky aspects to such rights and a long-standing question of their enforceability. However, this proposal rests on flagrant religious discrimination against one group. It seeks to “protect” the United States by denying the very essence of who we are as a nation.

250 thoughts on “Trump Calls For “Total and Complete Shutdown” of Muslims Entering The United States”

  4. WTC 7 Controlled Demolition;
    “Shortly before the building collapsed, several NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein, the property developer of One World Financial Center was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building – since its foundation was already unstable and expected to fall.”
    “According to Fox News journalist Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, Silverstein tried on the afternoon of 9/11 to get approval to demolish WTC 7.”
    The demolition was planned in advance. No steel framed structure has ever been brought down by fire.
    http://www1.ae911truth.org/faqs/696-faq-10-did-wtc-7-owner-larry-silverstein-admit-to-ordering-the-controlled-demolition-of-the-building-.html

  5. Has Donald Trump reported the crimes of 9/11 as per 18 U.S. Code § 4 – Misprision of felony?
    If he hasn’t I see him guilty of 18 U.S. Code § 4 – Misprision of felony
    Donald Trump is guilty of 9/11 cover up

    1. Patriot, you’re preaching to the choir that if there’s credible and substantial evidence he had intentionally conspired to demolish WTC-7 (I assume the Twin Towers which he leased would be part of the same conspiracy) without government approval, then Silverstein should be prosecuted for murder, among other things. Further, he should return to the insurer the $4.55B proceeds.

  8. Lawyers take an oath to uphold the Constitution.
    I guess what I am getting at is that lawyers, in that oath, have a responsibility to report crime to the proper authorities as the 9/11 crime exposed here with the obvious felonies.
    Another avenue would be the insurance fraud by Larry Silverstein regarding the towers in how they were destroyed.

    1. Patriot: Good luck with your prosecution of Larry Silverstein. Even if he had “knowledge of the actual commission of a felony,” it’s one thing to know it and quite another to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. If Ronald Reagan can get away with “I don’t recall” in the Iran-Contra affair, perhaps you can see how difficult it would be to make an allegation against Silverstein without being able to prove it.

      Lawyers, like any other person present in the US have no duty to report a crime unless mandated by law, e.g., mandatory reporters such as psychotherapists and even lawyers in some states, but lawyers have no such duty in California.

  9. It has gotten kind of quiet in here. How about this.. aren’t lawyers U.S. officials?
    U.S. officials and media are guilty of this felony on innumerable governmental crimes
    18 U.S. Code § 4 – Misprision of felony
    Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

    1. Patriot, this really is a good question, and at first blush I’d answer it like this: lawyers are not US officials unless appointed to some federal agency by the President.

  10. If there remains anyone in the justice dept. with any ethics;
    I understand that with the authority of 18 U.S.C. § 3144, the United States government can seek a warrant from a judicial officer in order to arrest a material witness. I believe Larry Silverstein should be arrested as a material witness and put in the witness protection program.

  12. Larry Silverstein: 9/11’s Inside Man

    3 NYC SKYSCRAPERS WERE DESTROYED BY CONTROLLED DEMOLITION ON 9/11

    “SCIENTISTS, ARCHITECTS, & ENGINEERS now affirm that the 9/11 destruction of the World Trade Center buildings was an inside job.
    The leading scientist of Scholars For 9/11 Truth, Dr Steven Jones, has proven that controlled demolition devices were placed within the WTC Twin Towers – and this is what brought the buildings down not the airplanes.”

    http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=238

  15. By the way, since we are on Trump’s case, how come we are ignoring the FACT that the thousands of Muslims cheering 9/11 were actually 5 Israelis recording and cheering…
    What, are we just gonna let it go?
    Why?
    Why?

  16. What is it about these commentators that they keep asking questions but refuse to answer one?

    Ralph, It is hard to refute facts when they conflate all kinds of disparate standards. I answered every one of your points however, you have yet to address any of mine. Please answer these questions below to give us a better insight into what your argument is.

    1- Is islam a religion, an ethnicity, a culture, a location?
    Who do we mean when we talk about Muslims (yes, Muslims are the adherents of Islam)?

    2- Does the Nobel prize celebrate a religious accomplishment? An ethnic one? A national one?

    3- What happens to a Jewish neuroscientist when he converts to islam?

    4-Is Ben Carson a lesser neuroscientist because he is not a white scientist?

    5- Asian and Latinos have won very few nobel prizes, does that mean they are inferior to white, Christian and Jewish people? Even when they are Christian?

    6- According to your standard, Buddhists are really waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay at the bottom of all people, i doubt they have won even one single nobel prize.
    So lazy, these buddhists!

    7- Are you saying the nobel prize is an objective process? What, is it computerized? No? A group of people pick their nominees and they vote on it?
    So each one of them picks the nominee they like? Subjectively?
    No way!!

    8- Where did you find the word #ultrasubcretin?
    I have never heard anyone use it…perhaps because everyone is smart enough NOT to use it!
    What, did you pick it up at recess? Someone called you that?
    Ultra suggests waay above standard …
    Sub suggests waay below standard…
    Cretin is French for, well, you…
    Ultra and sub cancel each other out
    Leaving cretin, alone, lonely…you
    So, basically, you called me…YOU… twice…? Weird!

    1. po – I realize that English is not your first language, however:

      ultra means extreme or extremely
      sub means below
      cretin means a person who is deformed and mentally handicapped because of congenital thyroid deficiency.

      Therefore it is someone who is extremely below a person who is deformed and mentally handicapped because of congenital thyroid deficiency.

      1. Paul, as usual, you lose the thread!
        cretin is french, and it is used to mean dumb/ stupid/ a moron (Ralph)
        As for ultra, you used extreme, which is wrong, because extreme is arbitrary, extreme to what extent? Most extreme? Almost most extreme?
        Waaay above standard spans the range above midline to include some form of extreme.
        Same for Sub.

        How does it feel that this foreigner, for whom english is a 4th language, can teach you, an ex teacher (we won’t linger and ponder about the reasons behind your firin…dismissa.. uh, no longer teaching) the finer points of your native language 😕

        1. po – we are speaking English now. Words from other languages are subsumed into English and take on other meanings. Ultrasubcretin means exactly what I said it did.

          1. Paul C

            Despite po’s purported claims of being multilingual, any actual serious student of languages would fully comprehend that utilizing a very literal and word-for-word translation of either phrases or singular words will most likely result in major mistakes and guffaws. There are, quite literally, meanings that transcend either the written or spoken word. I know. I’ve studied various languages since I could walk. Trying to get anything through to po, however, is an exercise in futility. You must enjoy tilting at windmills, Paul C. By all means, have at it.

  17. Ralph, Don’t let him get to you. DBQ is as sharp as they come, although Mortimer Snerd could see through his lame attempts @ manipulation.

  18. po, your puerile attempt to create a schism between me and dust bunny where none exists and your utter contempt for facts merely proves you feckless. You cannot refute any facts that have been presented to you because you have an utter disdain for facts. And as for your lame argument about Muslims winning “peace” prizes? Another infantile red herring. I have pointed out that those are subjective, political awards. They have absolutely nothing to do with benefiting humanity in any way. I suppose that you think that Yasser Arafat — who won such a phony “peace” prize in 1994 — means that Arafat had done something to benefit mankind. Only a ultrasubcretin would think that.

  19. Democrats have been terrorist sympathizers. The so called constitutional law “professor ” does not know a thing about the constitution and there is no fuss by the media about that , and here someone is trying to protect the country from barbarians but no the idiots of the media and do called professors will start screaming !

  20. Steve Jobs was adopted. His biological father, who did NOT raise him or ever have any contact with him….was from Syria. And so what? Islam is not a biological condition. Muslim is not a race therefore if you don’t like Islam and think that Muslims should be not allowed (temporarily) to immigrate to the United States, it doesn’t make you a racist. Islam is an ideology. It is a cult.

    The ideology of Islam is”antithetical to civilization. This is why no Muslim has won a Nobel Prize in science, medicine, or economics” Quite so.

    So, even though Jobs may have had one biological parent that was Muslim, the upbringing by his adoptive parents in a stable Western cultural society is what created the man Steve Jobs.

    Islam has doo diddly squat to do with Steve Jobs and thank goodness for that, because had he been raised Muslim we would likely have none of the inventions and advances provided him. He would not be the Steve Jobs we knew.

    1. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, DBQ! MWAAH! Kisses!
      You made my point while undermining Ralphie’s.
      I owe you.

      Ralph’s point is that with his muslim blood, Steve is the exception to the rule that muslims are inferior beings.
      Your point is that Steve Jobs became Steve Jobs BECAUSE of his stable upbringing in a stable western society. That implies that were he a Muslim WHILE growing up in that stable western society, he could still be Steve Jobs (or Ahmad Jobs). So the differentiating cause is neither “ideology(?), nor cult(?), it is means and environment and opportunities.
      Thank you, thank you, DBQ.

      Now, sorry we must do this, but…since you and Ralph are saying the exact opposite thing, hate to say this, but one of yous is lying!
      One is yous is talking out one’s rear end!

      Now, I have known you for a long time, and I respect your intellect though I lament how you use it.
      Ralph? Meh! He is neither bright nor rational.
      Based on that alone, I side with you. Yeah!!!
      Based on the value of the argument you both made, I am definitely ranging to your side, completely, and agree with you that Ralph Adamo is a dummy!

Comments are closed.