gcomeau wrote:PeterZ wrote:That's the point. Due process assumes those impacted have standing and are within the court's jurisdiction.
The President who issued an order is within the court's jurisdiction.
The TSA and ICE agents who were implementing that order are within the court's jurisdiction.
The green card holders who were being denied entry without any stated grounds for suddenly overturning their legal immigration status are within the court's jurisdiction.
The US citizens whose family members were suddenly being denied the right to come and see them are within the court's jurisdiction.
Do I need to continue?These are foreign nationals who are not even in the US. When the President acts in accord with his authority to limit immigration,
There are limits on how he may choose to do that. He grossly exceeded them in multiple ways. (Arbitrarily revoking already granted legal immigration status from an entire class of people with no due process, wording the order such that it imposed a de facto religious test for expedited entry... )
No, you need not continue. Denying valid green card holders with re-entry permits entry is indeed a problem. As I under stand the issue, the EO would not have included those people as it was being implemented. This was part of the testimony before the 9th Circuit.
Family members of American citizens who themselves are not American citizens are not guaranteed entry to the US. They may apply for entry and permanent residency with preference, but are not entitled to it. My grandmother was denied entry because she was determined to have a mental illness. Nervous breakdowns do happen when one lives through WWII Japanese occupation.
Again, the EO was targeted at those people who have not already obtained entry from those listed 7 nations. By allowing the stay the 9th Circuit asserts the President cannot limit immigration in such a way. The ruling asserts the court's consent is required to implement immigration policy. That is not what Article 1 section 8 states.