A question to the President of the United States, Donald Trump: is it a travel ban, or a Muslim ban, or a travel Muslim ban?
| Autor | Mohamed Arafa |
| Cargo | Adjunct Professor of Islamic Law at Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law (Indianapolis, United States of America). Assistant Professor of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice at Alexandria University Faculty of Law (Alexandria, Egypt). Doctor of Juridical Science (S.J.D.), 2013, Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law |
| Páginas | 9-33 |
Licenciado sob uma Licença Creative Commons
Licensed under Creative Commons
A question to the President of the United States, Donald Trump:
is it a travel ban, or a Muslim ban, or a travel Muslim ban?
Uma pergunta ao Presidente dos Estados Unidos, Donald
Trump: trata-se de uma proibição de viajar, de um banimento de
muçulmanos ou de uma proibição de muçulmanos viajarem?
MOHAMED ARAFA*
Indiana University School of Law (United States of America)
Alexandria University Faculty of Law (Egypt)
marafa@iupui.edu
Recebido/Received: 18.04.2018 / April 18th, 2018
Aprovado/Approved: 25.04.2018 / April 25th, 2018
Como citar esse artigo/How to cite this article: ARAFA, Mohamed. A question to the President of the United States, Donald Trump:
is it a travel ban, or a Muslim ban, or a travel Muslim ban? Revista de Investigações Constitucionais, Curitiba, vol. 5, n. 2, p.
9-33, mai./ago. 2018. DOI: 10.5380/rinc.v5i2.58990.
* Adjunct Professor of Islamic Law at Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law (Indianapolis, United States of Amer-
ica). Assistant Professor of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice at Alexandria University Faculty of Law (Alexandria, Egypt). Doctor
of Juridical Science (S.J.D.), 2013, Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law. Master of Laws (LL.M.) in American
Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, 2008, University of Connecticut School of Law (USA). Bachelor of Laws (LL.B.), 2006, Alexandria
University, Faculty of Law (“English” Department) (Alexandria, Egypt). E-mail: marafa@iupui.edu.
Abstract
Recently, the United States Supreme Court passed a
victory to the current President Donald J. Trump by re-
vitalizing parts of a travel ban on individuals from six
Muslim-majority countries that he alleged is needed for
national security and the interests of the United States
but that adversaries criticize and claim as biased and
discriminatory. The justices lessened the scope of lower
court decisions that had entirely blocked crucial parts
of a March 6, 2017 executive order that Trump had said
was required to avert terrorism attacks, permitting his
temporary ban to go into eect for folks with no strong
ties to the United States. In this domain, the court issued
its order on the last day of its current term and agreed
to hear oral arguments again at a later stage, so it can
Resumo
Recentemente, a Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos apro-
vou uma vitória do atual presidente, Donald J. Trump, revi-
talizando partes de uma proibição de viagem de indivídu-
os de seis países de maioria muçulmana que ele alegou
ser necessária para a segurança nacional ea os interesses
dos Estados Unidos. Os adversários criticam e reivindicam
como uma medida tendenciosa e discriminatória. Os juízes
diminuíram o escopo das decisões de tribunais inferiores
que haviam bloqueado totalmente partes cruciais de uma
ordem executiva de 6 de março de 2017 que Trump armou
ser necessária para evitar ataques terroristas, permitindo
que sua proibição temporária fosse efetivada por pessoas
sem vínculos fortes com a lei para os Estados Unidos. Neste
domínio, o tribunal emitiu a sua ordem no último dia do
9
Revista de Investigações Constitucionais, Curitiba, vol. 5, n. 2, p. 9-33, maio/ago. 2018.
Revista de Investigações Constitucionais
ISSN 2359-5639
DOI: 10.5380/rinc.v5i2.58990
Revista de Investigações Constitucionais, Curitiba, vol. 5, n. 2, p. 9-33, maio/ago. 2018.
MOHAMED ARAFA
10
CONTENTS
1. Introduction and overview; 2. Donald Trump’s immigration ban and Barak Obama’s 2011 policy: any
major dierences? 3. The legitimacy of Trump’s travel Muslim ban: is it constitutional and legal? 3.1.
Literature Legal and Political Background; 3.2. But Was It Legal? What Are the Legal Arguments? 4. The
Second Revised Executive Order (Travel Ban) and the Supreme Court’s Stance; 5. A new gyration on
why the travel ban is unconstitutional and the potential expectations of the U.S. Supreme Court on the
Muslim ban case: conclusion; 6. References.
1. INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
After his inauguration on January 20, 2017, President Donald J. Trump signed
a controversial executive order on January 27, 2017 stumbling all refugee admissions
and temporarily barring individuals from seven Muslim-majority countries.1 The move
glimmered several protests and legal challenges. After the issuance of that ban, a fede-
ral judge in Seattle suspended it nationally, permitting debarred visitors to travel to the
US pending an appeal by the administration.2 President Trump and his followers say the
debatable executive order makes good on election promises to “Make America Great
Again.”3 But what is the order, labeled the “Muslim ban” by those standing against it, and
1 GEORGE, Varghese K. Original Travel Ban Should Have Stayed, Says Donald Trump. The Hindu, June 5, 2017.
Available at: <http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/original-travel-ban-should-have-stayed-says-
donald trump/article18724064.ece>. (“… Mr. Trump ratcheted up his rhetoric against terrorism soon after the
London attack. He rst criticized the city’s Mayor Sadiq Khan. In another tweet, he said: “We must stop being
politically correct and get down to the business of security for our people. If we don’t get smart it will only get
worse.” . . . “People, the lawyers and the courts can call it whatever they want, but I am calling it what we need
and what it is, a TRAVEL BAN!”) (last visited Sep. 20, 2017).
2 REINL, James, Trump’s Muslim Ban Comes into Eect (“As ban on visitors from six Muslim-majority coun-
tries kicks in, US-based families of those aected express resentment”). Aljazeera, June 29, 2017. Available at:
3 FOSTER, Alice. What are the Countries Donald Trump is Banning Travel From? And What Are His Reasons?
Express, June 27, 2017. Available at: <http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/761087/Donald-Trump-immigra-
tion-ban-what-seven-countries-reasons-US-banning-Muslim-travellers>. Last visited: 20 sept. 2017. “The US
Supreme Court has revived parts of Donald Trump’s ban immigration from six predominantly Muslim countries
in the Middle East and Africa. But which countries does he want to ban and why?”) (“In January, the new US
President imposed a controversial 90-day ban on travelers from seven countries – Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Su-
dan, Syria and Yemen. But after the ban was lifted by the courts, Mr. Trump issued a new ban that removed Iraq
from the list of countries aected by the travel ban. Federal judges blocked the new ban . . . But the Supreme
Court has now revived parts of the ban, allowing it to go into eect for travelers with no strong ties to the US.
Donald Trump tweeted: “Great day for America’s future Security and Safety, courtesy of the US. Supreme Court.
I will keep ghting for the American people, & WIN!””.
decide lastly whether the ban is legitimate in a foremost
test of presidential powers and controls.
Keywords: travel ban; Muslims; US Supreme Court; hu-
man rights; immigration law.
atual mandato e concordou em ouvir os argumentos orais
novamente numa fase posterior, pelo que pode decidir, por
último, se a proibição é legítima em um teste de primeira
linha dos poderes e controles presidenciais.
Palavras-chave: proibição de viajar; muçulmanos; Supre-
ma Corte dos EUA; Direitos Humanos; Lei de imigração.
Para continuar a ler
PEÇA SUA AVALIAÇÃO