Judges Ruling Against Trump’s Travel Ban Used Faulty, Leaked Documents to Support Their Decisions


The entire matter of the judges ordering that the two travel bans issued by President Trump be prevented from being implemented may well have been supported by a leaked document that is not even accurate. So eager were these activist judges to rule in the way that the did, the they used faulty information to support their rulings.

Both federal judges who issued separate decisions on March 15 revoking President Trump’s travel ban cited a draft Department Homeland Security document leaked to the Associated Press by an unknown person and included in a story published on February 24 as evidence central to their rulings.

The significance of the unofficial leaked draft DHS document upon which these two federal judges relied in making their controversial travel ban decisions is the false information it conveys about the level of risk posed to national security by refugees who commit terrorist acts.

At issue with the travel ban precisely was the risk travelers of immigrants from the subject countries presented to the U.S. This got lost in the judges’ rulings partly because the evidence they used to support their decision was inappropriate and erroneous.

Neither Judge Chuang nor Judge Watson noted that two Somali refugees, Dahir Adan in St. Cloud, Minnesota, and Abul Razak Ali Artan in Columbus, Ohio, committed acts of terror during a two month period in 2016, the first in September 2016 and the second in November 2016, that injured  a total of 21 Americans.

The data included in the leaked draft document “is dramatically different than the data reported in another list of terrorists compiled by former Senator, now Attorney General, Jeff Sessions,” Breitbart News reported last month.

According to a document published by the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest, “DOJ Public/Unsealed Terrorism and Terrorism-Related Convictions 9/11/01-12/31/14,” 74 people from the seven countries identified in the temporary travel ban in Executive Order 13679–Iran (3), Iraq (19), Libya (1), Somalia (21), Syria (7), Sudan (3), and Yemen (20)–were arrested and convicted of terrorist acts between 2001 and 2014.

The Senate document identified 580 terrorists arrested and convicted, 375 of whom were foreign-born whose country of origin was also included in the report.

Clearly there was and is a significant danger originating from allowing unvetted migrants from the selected countries to enter the U.S., yet the judges who ruled as they did ignored this fact in their rush to prevent President Trump’s orders from going into effect.

While there existed Senate reports at the time that provided damning evidence concerning the risks to the country of allowing individuals from the subject countries to enter the U.S., these judges refused to consider that evidence and instead used the memo that supported their decisions.

Neither Judge Chuang nor Judge Watson mentioned these two Senate reports – “DOJ Public/Unsealed Terrorism and Terrorism-Related Convictions 9/11/01-12/31/14,” and “Individuals Implicated in Terrorism Since March 2014,” in their decisions.

Instead, they relied upon the draft DHS document leaked to the Associated Press and published in the February 24 Associated Press article.

What we have here are faulty rulings based on faulty evidence. Clearly these judges should know better, but for some reasons chose to base their decisions to block President Trump’s travel bank largely on leaked document that did not tell the whole story. It does suggest that perhaps they had an agenda going into this matter.

Source: Breitbart



Share

62 Comments

Leave a Reply

Pin It on Pinterest