Appeals Court Rules Revised Trump Travel Ban Unconstitutional
by Stephen Lendman
Straightaway in office, Trump continued war on Islam begun by his predecessors - waging naked aggression abroad, along with banning Muslim immigration from seven countries on the phony pretext of preventing terrorist attacks.
High-profile ones attributed to Muslims were state-sponsored false flags, including 9/11, the mother of them all.
America needs enemies to justify imperial wars, Muslim Arabs its designated one of choice, wrongfully portrayed as violent, fanatical and dangerous.
Trump's travel ban was struck down at the federal and appeals court levels. A revised one followed - as Islamophobic as the initial one.
Both versions have nothing to do with border control and keeping the nation safe from foreign terrorists, as claimed - everything to do with fear-mongering and waging war on Islam.
On Thursday, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a district court injunction blocking Trump's travel ban, saying it "speaks with vague words of national security, but in context drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination."
Chief circuit judge Roger Gregory added: "Congress granted the President broad power to deny entry to aliens, but that power is not absolute."
"It cannot go unchecked when, as here, the President wields it through an executive edict that stands to cause irreparable harm to individuals across this nation."
Trump's ban targets people on the basis of their religious beliefs in nations ravaged by US aggression and/or opposed to its imperial agenda - not for any threat its population poses to national security.
In response to Thursday's ruling, Attorney General Sessions said "(t)his Department of Justice will continue to vigorously defend the power and duty of the Executive Branch to protect the people of this country from danger, and will seek review of this case in the United States Supreme Court."
It'll have final say. However it rules, this issue will be around for a long time. Trump's order ignited a firestorm of opposition.
If upheld by the Supreme Court, a future Congress may strike it down legislatively - by a veto-proof margin if necessary or with a new administration in power.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at email@example.com.
His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.
Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.