Logan Pollard
California News Service
SAN FRANCISCO – In a thinly veiled contest over states’ versus federal rights, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco has upped the ante by further debating the contentious travel ban blocking some refugees from entering the U.S. from certain conflict zones.
Meanwhile, refugee advocates and lawmakers seem to be winning the PR offensive that the ban is unnecessary. Attorney General Xavier Becerra on Wednesday evening announced he’s joining 16 other state AGs in filing a friend-of-the-court brief in another case against the ban. And the Los Angeles City Council unanimously passed a motion Wednesday that would prohibit city employees from participating in any “Muslim Registry.”
City Councilman Paul Krekorian proposed the motion.
“The point of the motion today was to instruct the city attorney to begin work on an ordinance that would prohibit city employees from becoming complicit in any effort by the federal government to create a registry based on someone’s religion,” he explained.
Critics argue that so far there is no proposed registry. The council still needs to debate the exact terminology of the ordinance and how it would be implemented.
Krekorian also serves on a committee that oversees Los Angeles International Airport. This group heard testimony this week from a student who was refused entry. Meanwhile, Krekorian is waiting for the Ninth Circuit to rule.
“Regardless of how they ultimately rule, I do know that this is a shameful, disgraceful time in American history when the president of the United States uses the full force and authority of our national government against innocent people,” he said.
Supporters of the ban say this is a security issue, and the real problem was poor communication in its implementation. President Trump’s order flagged travelers from seven majority-Muslim nations. A ruling from the Ninth Circuit is expected by the end of the week.
