Attorney Majid Foroozandeh Discusses Constitutionality of Trump’s Immigration Ban

Immigration Attorney Majid Foroozandeh

It is important to note that Congress’ approval is not necessary for the order to be law, and an executive order has the same effect as if the law was passed by Congress.

Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution provides the President of the United States the executive power to issue executive orders. As such, President Trump recently issued an executive order prohibiting for 90 days the entry of travelers from six predominantly Muslim countries (Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen), which was subsequently blocked by two federal judges.

“It is important to note that Congress’ approval is not necessary for the order to be law, and an executive order has the same effect as if the law was passed by Congress,” said attorney Majid Foroozandeh, founder of the Law Offices of Foroozandeh, APC. “But what if the executive order itself violates other provisions of the U.S. Constitution? So far, multiple federal judges have ruled enjoining the immigration ban. But why?”

It is stated in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. If a law is such that it would hinder establishment of Islam as a religion, for example, or the free exercise of Muslims, it would violate the First Amendment. “But has President Trump’s executive order actually hindered Muslims from establishing Islam or has it prohibited Muslims from freely exercising their religion?” asked Foroozandeh.

Section 8 U.S. Code § 1182 states that “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the…

Read the full article from the Source…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *