Trump’s Muslim Ban Illegal, Unconstitutional: US Academic

“These actions are illegal, immoral and irrational,” William P. Quigley, Professor of Law and Director of the Loyola Law Clinic & the Gillis Long Poverty Law Center, told the Tasnim News Agency.

He added, “This violates the First Amendment to the US Constitution which says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...".

Bill Quigley has been an active public interest and human rights lawyer since 1977. He has served as counsel with a wide range of public interest organizations on issues including Katrina social justice issues, public housing, voting rights, death penalty, living wage, human rights, civil liberties, educational reform, constitutional rights and civil disobedience. Bill has litigated numerous cases with the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People) Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., the Advancement Project, and with the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) of Louisiana where he was General Counsel for over 15 years. He has been an active lawyer with School of the Americas Watch and the Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti.  Bill served as Legal Director of the Center for Constitutional Rights in NYC from 2009 to 2011 before returning to Loyola.

Following is the full text of the interview.

Tasnim: On Friday, US President Donald Trump signed an executive order that imposes a 90-day entry ban for citizens of Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Libya and Somalia, blocks refugees from Syria indefinitely, and suspends all refugee admissions for 120 days. The move has sparked confusion and anger at major US airports. In fact, Trump's executive order is a Muslim ban. This is while a recent study from Duke University sociologist Charles Kurzman has found that Muslims living in the United State were involved in only one-third of 1 percent of all murders in the country in 2016. What is the aim of such a move? What repercussions will this have?

Quigley: These actions are illegal, immoral and irrational.  The courts have stopped them temporarily.  Hopefully, they will soon stop them permanently.   People and leaders of many religions have also condemned these actions as immoral.  They are irrational as they do not actually address terrorism at all. President Trump is openly politically grandstanding in order to try to please the hardliners who supported him. 

Tasnim: How do you see this from a legal perspective? Is there any legal procedure whereby the order can be reversed? Kindly explain.

Quigley: The courts have started to dismantle these illegal orders. The first step, which they have taken, is to issue temporary relief to protect the people who were on the way to the US or actually arrived.  This is only a small first step since this happened on Friday and the case was filed Saturday.  Next step is to ask for a complete dismantling of the action.  That will happen in a request for a preliminary injunction which I assume will be filed in the next week or so.  This will be a fierce fight but what President did is shameful and I am hopeful it will be totally reversed.

Tasnim: Do you believe that the move is against the US Constitution and international law? Kindly explain.

Quigley: Yes.  It is unconstitutional for the government to prefer one religion over another. Trump, in his words and in his actions, is taking anti-Muslim government position.  This violates the First Amendment to the US Constitution which says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...".

Tasnim: As you know Trump has excluded Saudi Arabia and certain Persian Gulf states in his order. Back in July 2016, the US government released 28 pages of a congressional report on the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, which show the Saudi government may have had a hand in the attacks. “While in the United States, some of the September 11 hijackers were in contact with, and received support or assistance from, individuals who may be connected to the Saudi Government…there is information, primarily from FBI sources, that at least two of those individuals were alleged by some to be Saudi intelligence officers,” reads part of the report. What is your take on this?

Quigley: The fact that President Trump said this was about 9-11 and terrorism and excluded Saudi Arabia is further evidence of his political intentions and the irrationality of the action.