Thread: Analysis: Ninth Circuit Would Allow 9/11 Hijacker to Sue to Come to U.S.

by JOEL B. POLLAK
10 Feb 2017
3,814 comments

The judgment of the Ninth Circuit upholding the temporary restraining order (TRO) against President Donald Trump’s recent executive order restricting travel from seven terror-prone countries would have allowed one of the 9/11 hijackers to sue the government to come to, or stay in, the United States.

Under the court’s novel theory of legal standing, “injuries” to public universities that result from foreign students and teachers not being able to enter the country give the states standing to sue.

Moreover, the court held that foreigners with visas have due process rights under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, even though the precedent it cited applied to people already in the United States. Those due process rights could also be asserted by states on behalf of people in the U.S. illegally or “who have a relationship with a U.S. resident or … institution,” the court held in its ruling.

Hani Hasan Hanjour was one of the four pilots in the September 11, 2001 attack. He flew American Airlines flight 77 into the Pentagon, killing 184 people, including everyone on the flight. He was in the U.S. on a student visa, according to the 9/11 Commission report.

He was from Saudi Arabia, a country not covered by the executive order. By the reasoning of the Ninth Circuit, however, Hanjour would have due process rights to challenge his exclusion from the United States once he had been granted a student visa. His relationship with a U.S. “institution” — in this case, an English as a Second Language school in Oakland, California — would have been enough to grant him standing. A state could have sued on his behalf even while he was still abroad.

Hanjour did not, in fact, attend the English as a Second Language school in California, but resumed flight training in Arizona that he had begun on an earlier visit, the 9/11 Commission found.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...stay-come-u-s/

Gowdy Blasts 9th Circuit Ruling Against Trump Immigration Ban

"A disgraceful decision."

by Randy DeSoto February 10, 2017 at 9:33am

Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., blasted the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal’s ruling against the Trump administration’s temporary travel and immigration ban, saying, “There is no right to come to this country for non-citizens…”

Gowdy, who is a former federal prosecutor and current member of the House Judiciary Committee, released a statement following the Thursday night decision, in which he first observed, “No one familiar with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals should be surprised at today’s ruling. The 9th Circuit has a well-earned reputation for being presumptively reversible.”

The congressman tore into the reasoning of the three judge panel’s opinion, which left a Seattle federal district court judge’s temporary restraining order blocking implementation of President Trump’s executive order in place. The executive order calls for a 90-day pause in travel and immigration from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen.

In their ruling, the justices listed the due process and First Amendment rights of those seeking to enter the country as reasons the Trump administration’s ban will likely be ruled unconstitutional.

Gowdy wrote in response, “Of particular interest is the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals suggestion that even those unlawfully present in the country have certain due process rights with respect to immigration".

Due process rights refer to the Fifth Amendment’s language, which states that no person “shall be denied life, liberty or property without due process of law.”

“It seems clear to most of us–not the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals–there is no right to come to this country for non-citizens of the United States,” Gowdy said.

He continued, “It also seems clear judges are neither in a position, practically or jurisprudentially, to second guess national security determinations made by the Commander-in-Chief.”

President Trump also went after the legal reasoning of the judges, pointing out that they did not even once reference the relevant statute at issue in the case.

At a gathering of law enforcement officers Wednesday, Trump read the statute which grants the president authority, for the period of time he deems necessary, to “suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate” based on his determination their entry would be “detrimental to the national interest.”

Trump contended, “If you’re a good student in high school or a bad student in high school,” you can read the plain language of the law and find in his administration was acting with full authority.

The president lamented at the gathering that judges have become too “political.”

The Trump administration is weighing its next move, which could either be to request an “en banc” hearing at the 9th Circuit increasing the number of judges on the panel from three to 10, to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court, or to rewrite the executive order to further clarify its scope.

The chances of the executive order going to the Supreme Court are high, given contradictory federal rulings concerning the executive order.

Last week, Massachusetts’ based federal judge Nathaniel Gorton found the president used the authority Congress granted him for the stated reason of ensuring “that resources are available to review screening procedures and that adequate standards are in place to protect against terrorist attacks.”

Therefore Gorton ruled, in “light of the ‘plenary congressional power to make polices and rules for exclusion of aliens … which pursuant to 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), has been delegated to the president, the court concludes that the government’s reasons, as provided in the [executive order], are facially legitimate and bona fide.”

http://www.westernjournalism.com/gow...migration-ban/

The 9th Circuit needs to be shut down and reorganized. There may also be elements of corruption in this circuit. I do not believe by the questions and responses I heard that any of their actions and decisions were based on law, but rather on politics which would to me signal corruption. Did you know one of the Judges, Clifton, is based in Honolulu??!!! Doesn't even live on the mainland, let alone in San Francisco. How does that work? And this is the Bush appointee. Geez.