President Trumps’s Immigration Order

When I got home tonight, the news of President Trumps’s executive order barring people in seven countries he has deemed terror-prone, from entering the U.S. I went to the New York Times website, I read the news. I felt a certain sadness and empathy come over me as I read the heart-wrenching stories of those affected. Young people studying at Harvard, MIT, Yale, and Stanford. Whether they were studying abroad or visiting family, they were barred from entering the country. Even a Christian family was detained in Pennsylvania. A U.S. veteran who was coming here from Iraq was chained to a table as he wept in front of reporters. These are the people who are being affected by your immigration order, Mr.President.

Judge Ann M. Donnelly of the Federal District Court in Brooklyn ruled in favor of the ACLU in the case they filed against President Trump and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Judge Donnelly was nominated by former President Obama.


Just after Judge Donnelly’s ruling, a similar ruling by Judge Leonie M. Brinkema of the Federal District Court in Virginia occurred. The ruling issued a temporary restraining order for one week blocking the removal of anyone holding a green card at Dulles International Airport.


Judge Donnelly’s ruling claims that sending travelers home could cause them “irreparable harm.”

The judge’s ruling is below:


UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ————————————————————— X HAMEED KHALID DARWEESH and HAIDER SAMEER ABDULKHALEQ ALSHA WI, 011 behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, Petitioners, – against – DONALD TRUMP, President oft/1e United States; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (“OHS”); U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION (“CBP”); JOHN KELLY, Secretary of DHS; KEVIN K. MCALEENAN,Acting Commissioner ofCBP; JAMES T. MADDEN, New York Field Director, CBP,, Respondents. —————————————————————X ANN DONNELLY, District Judge. DECISION AND ORDER 17 Civ. 480 (AMD)


On January 28, 2017, the petitioners filed an Emergency Motion for Stay of Removal on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated. IT APPEARING to the Court from the Emergency Motion for Stay of Removal, the other submissions, the arguments of counsel, and the hearing held on the 28th of January, 201 7,

1. The petitioners have a strong likelihood of success in establishing that the removal of the petitioner and others similarly situated violates their rights to Due Process and Equal Protection guaranteed by the United States Constitution;

2. There is imminent danger that, absent the stay of removal, there will be substantial and irreparable injury to refugees, visa-holders, and other individuals from nations subject to the January 2 7, 2017 Executive Order;

3. The issuance of the stay of removal will not injure the other parties interested in the proceeding;

4. It is appropriate and just that, pending completion of a hearing before the Court on the merits of the Petition, that the Respondents be enjoined and restrained from the commission of further acts and misconduct in violation of the Constitution as described in the Emergency Motion for Stay of Removal.

WHEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the respondents, their officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and all members and persons acting in concert or participation with them, from the date of this Order, are

ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from, in any manner or by any means, removing individuals with refugee applications approved by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services as part of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, holders of valid immigrant and non-immigrant visas, and other individuals from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen legally authorized to enter the United States.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that to assure compliance with the Court’s order, the Court directs service of this Order upon the United States Marshal for the Eastern District of New York, and further directs the United States Marshals Service to take those actions deemed necessary to enforce the provisions and prohibitions set forth in this Order.



Dated: Brooklyn, New York January 28, 2017

Source: NY Times.

Picture: Victor J. Blue for The NY Times


3 thoughts on “President Trumps’s Immigration Order

  1. The vetting process from Muslim countries known to dislike us should have been implemented long ago under O’s watch. Until something bad happens to these people, whether it is an illegal immigrant or terrorist, they will not understand.


  2. Here from the link in your comment on the NYT board. Solid blog. Good for you, Braeden. Just wish you wouldn’t give him the honor of the title. His son has said that this gig was “a step down” for his father (; he has diminished and demeaned the office and the country and deserves no honor or respect whatever.
    R Nelson


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s