The story appears on

Page A3

February 14, 2017

GET this page in PDF

Free for subscribers

View shopping cart

Related News

Home » World

Washington official says he’ll uncover Trump’s motivation

WASHINGTON state’s attorney general has promised to uncover “what truly motivated” President Donald Trump’s executive order on immigration, an approach that could prompt a rare public examination of how a US president makes national security decisions.

The presidential order imposed a temporary ban on travelers from seven predominantly Muslim countries, but a federal judge has barred enforcement while the court considers a challenge brought by the state.

On Thursday, the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit left the judge’s ruling in place without deciding the ultimate merits of either side’s arguments. In its decision, the 9th Circuit cited a previous case establishing that “circumstantial evidence of intent, including statements by decision makers, may be considered in evaluating whether a governmental action was motivated by a discriminatory purpose.”

The Trump administration has argued the ban is necessary to prevent potential terrorists from entering the country and is not discriminatory because the text of the order does not mention any particular religion.

Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson has said he will move aggressively to obtain written documents and e-mails written by administration officials that might contain evidence the order was biased against Muslims or Islam. He said he would also move to depose administration officials.

Legal scholars say this could move the court into uncharted waters.

“The idea of looking at motive has never really been applied to the president,” said John Yoo, a former Justice Department lawyer in the George W. Bush administration. “It would represent a serious expansion of judicial oversight of what the president and the entire executive branch does,” said Yoo, now a professor at the University of California at Berkeley School of Law.

Trump has harshly criticized the federal judge in Washington for his decision and a top White House aide on Sunday accused the 9th Circuit of a “judicial usurpation of power.”

“The president’s powers here are beyond question,” senior policy adviser Stephen Miller told “Fox News Sunday.”

US courts have historically been careful about probing the motives behind laws, in part out of respect for the separation of powers between branches of government. But on questions of racial or religious discrimination, they have sometimes allowed intent to be examined.




 

Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.

沪公网安备 31010602000204号

Email this to your friend