Page 12 - 1182 News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana
Stay updated with breaking news from 1182. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
Top News In 1182 Today - Breaking & Trending Today
Country, if he got intelligence that, let s say, someone troos was trying to bring a dirty bomb into the country. are we required to issue immigrant visas to the 30% of people affected by this order even though once they arrive at the borders we can keep them from entering under 1182-f. a practical effect, implementation of the pause or ban, however you want to phrase it, sort of precludes relief under 1152? yes. we told the fourth circuit the state department has always implemented suspensions under 1182-f by denying visas. otherwise, you would be letting people come to the country with visa ace travel document and once they got to the borders, you would be turning them away. state department has never read 1182 or 1152 to require that fruitless exercise. if you agree with them on their reading of 1152, it can t ground of current junction. at most, it would be an ....
Think, judge paez, is the way that the state department has, which is to say, look, 1152 governs the issuance of immigrant visas all the time in lots of other contexts. where you have 1182 suspension, we re not denying you on the basis of your nationality, but you re invalidly suspended. if you thought they conflicted i would still say 1182-f as the more specific would trump. because what you re talking about is the president making a specific finding with respect to these categories of aliens and suspending their entry. but 1152 was more recent. congress passed that one in 65? that s right. but then you have to get past the presumption of implied appeals. when congress passed that why is that an implied repeal? you read them together. well, because we re taught to reconcile statutes and read them together. i think it s pretty clear that what congress was doing was getting rid of the previous nationality quotas on immigrant ....
Let s listen in. i just want to point out, i mean, if you really take their argument seriously, i think they re committed to the view that under 1182f, even if the president got actionable intelligence tomorrow that let s say a libyan national are attempting to enter the country but the president didn t know his identity to commit a terrorist act, they would say, the president can t suspend entry because that s a nationality based distinction. that would race constitutional concerns. courts have never read the statutes to conflict in that way. solicitor general wall, if i could interject a question on the merits here. the executive order sets out national security justifications. but how is a court to know if, in fact, it s a muslim ban in the guise of national security ....
Argue is the purpose of the statute as opposed to its language? no. i wouldn t say necessarily the purpose. i think that immigration law has always as the supreme court said you always have to look to relevant factors and understand what does congress deem relevant and what not? i think when you ask yourself that question nationality is now no longer such a factor. this saz transformational statute in 1965 passed with the voting rights act. that is why. that s on the 1152 argument. i don t want the court to lose sight of the 1182 which looks like it is a broad statute but it does ultimately supplant the more specific fine grained ten factor test that congress laid down and the government itself has said to the supreme court in the marx case that when you have a more specific statute that ....
Argument about the statute about 1182 that it would it is true that 1152, the nationality base discrimination the weight to uphold injunction as a whole would require reading statute to encompass nonimmigrant visas as judge hawkins was illustrating. that is our reading. we think this has been read but there is obviously going to be a question about that. with respect to the standing of refugees, both plaintiffs we think have standing. hawaii has standing because in washington versus trump the court found the state of washington had standing even on refugee claims before the court. here we have identified the government pointed to three refugees that have come in this year in 2017. they said in the district court ....