Why Trump's Immigration Policy Is a Legal Mess

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

On Tuesday, Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly released a pair of memos detailing his plans to transform Trump's executive orders on immigration into agency policy. The memos don't tell us much the orders didn't already – and that will remain mostly true until the details are published in the federal register – but experts are already poring over them looking for ways they could be challenged in court.

Unsurprisingly, there are several crucial details that the administration appears to have overlooked.

"The overall approach is deeply worrisome and really does promise a number of constitutional problems down the line," says Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project. "We've already shown that the courts and the public can stand up to Donald Trump when he attempts these kinds of unconstitutional actions, and I think both the courts and the public will be there to stop him again."

In interviews with Rolling Stone, Jadwat and Camille Mackler, director of legal initiatives for the New York Immigration Coalition, flagged several potential legal problems with Trump's immigration policy.

It would impede access to a lawyer

What the memo says:

Any immigrants arriving from a contiguous country – Mexico or Canada – can be returned to that country, regardless of where they're originally from, "pending the outcome of removal proceedings."

What an expert says:

This is a due process issue – and due process is a right guaranteed under the Fifth Amendment. "The Supreme Court has held that you're entitled to a lawyer in your immigration court proceedings. ... How are you going to ensure that the due process protections of immigration proceedings are upheld if you're forcing somebody to be in a foreign country, appearing via video?" Mackler says. "Just as a practical matter, how is a lawyer supposed to represent somebody when they are that far away?"

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/why-trumps-immigration-policy-is-a-legal-mess-w468346?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=daily&utm_campaign=022417_11

[Gothmog]

1. There will be a great deal of litigation on these policies

[bettyellen]

3. Can the next case force a discovery phase? I think they managed to escape it last time...

Because they'd have to explain what info justifies this. Now that someone leaked they were trying to get the intelligence agencies to (maybe backdate?) a report giving a rationale for it, that could screw them. I hope I hope.

Just wondering when the judicial branch can force that to happen.

[Wounded Bear]

2. The Bill of Rights nowhere has the term "citizen"...

It says "people" and "person." Technically, asking for your ID could be construed as a 4th/5th Amendment violation under the wrong circumstances, not to mention 9th/10th, and probably 6th/7th too.

There is a lot of case law that says the Trump EO is in violation.

[bettyellen]

4. And there's been so much reporting that the agencies executing are going beyond their reach - border

Patrol on domestic flights, ICE agents lying to the LAPD, customs or border patrol at airports ignoring the court order. looks like someone is phoning up and giving them super powers on the QT. wonder how much of that lawyers fighting this can use? Also they need to be forced into discovery to explain how they developed this- their intent seems consistent.