UC Irvine Law School professor Leah Litman has written a two-pronged op-ed in the LA Times attacking President Trump's travel ban as well as the idea of attaching an added question to census questionnaires asking if the respondent is a US citizen or not.
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-litman-census-question-supreme-court-trump-republican-20190603-story.html
"The court showed it didn’t care. The court upheld the order and cited a confusing ground — that there was a reasonable way to understand the order as having a legitimate justification, even if the order did not actually have one. And the court said it was reasonable to understand the order as legitimate, since the president justified it on the basis of national security."
As to the first issue, Litman completely ignores the real motivation behind the travel ban. That, pure and simple, is public safety. As politically incorrect as it is to say it, there are simply too many Muslims out there who, if allowed to enter the US, would try to kill us-not because their skin may be brown, black or white, rather due to their belief system. It has happened before and not just in the US. Europe is getting hit regularly, not only with terror attacks, but murderous crimes on its streets, which are well documented. President Trump is merely trying to save lives. That is reason enough since any nation has the sovereign right to decide who enters and does not enter its territory. There was a time when the US routinely denied entry to communists during the Cold War simply because they were dedicated to the ideal of eliminating democracy. Reason enough. But more importantly, there is a clear and present danger presented by jihadists pouring into our country from places where a thorough background check is not even possible. That is the legitimate justification, public safety-the government's chief duty- that Litman, a law professor, cannot see.
Secondly, Litman thinks that merely adding a question as to whether a census respondent is a US citizen will somehow cause them to be afraid to fill out the questionnaire. The question does not inquire as to whether the person is in the country illegally. It merely asks if they are a citizen. I have resided in three other countries besides the US. Had I been sent a census form and asked that question, I would have no problem answering. After all,. I was in the country legally to begin with. What would I have to fear? Pointing that out is not a call for the US to incorporate foreign law. It is just common sense.
"On Thursday, the plaintiffs challenging the census filed a letter explaining they had discovered by happenstance that a longtime Republican redistricting specialist had played a significant role in orchestrating the addition of the citizenship question. The specialist had previously advocated adding the question on the ground it would give an advantage to “Republicans and Non-Hispanic Whites.” He drafted a letter from the Department of Justice requesting the addition of the question, and the letter the department ultimately sent bore “striking similarities” to the specialist’s language and argument."
Assuming this charge is accurate, I would not condone the thinking of this unnamed "Republican redistricting specialist". It would be helpful if the learned law professor provided a little more documentation as to who this person is and the plaintiff letter "discovered by happenstance". Even Judge Judy requires documentation, you know. And if the person sent such a letter to the Justice Department, a competent lawyer would make a better case that the Department's letter bore "striking similarities" to the specialist's language and argument. How about a detailed comparison? Is Litman really suggesting that the DOJ letter argued that the question would help Republicans and non-Hispanic whites? She refers to a smoking gun but fails to really produce that smoking gun other than refer to a letter which she characterizes in her own fashion.
Litman's op-ed just goes to show that the UC Irvine Law School is little more than a leftist activist training ground, which has already been shown by many prior postings on this web site.
No comments:
Post a Comment