Bildet: Kellyanne Conway og Stephen Miller i kolonnaden til Det hvite hus, fredag 10 februar, under møtet med statsminister Shinzo Abe. Foto: Jim Bourg/Reuters/Scanpix.
Stephen Miller, en av nøkkelpersonene i den innerste kretsen rundt Trump, leverte et knallhardt angrep på dommerne som har opprettholdt suspensjonen av innreiserestriksjonene. De blander seg på områder som uttrykkelig er presidentens domene, sa Miller og lovte flere executive orders i nærmeste fremtid.
Hvis Miller reflekterer atmosfæren i Det hvite hus, så er det full gass fremover. Trump akter ikke å la seg sinke av dommere som forsøker å sette kjepper i hjulene for ham. Han er overbevist om at han har sitt på det tørre.
Miller var krystallklar på at det dommerne forsøker å tilrane seg, er definisjonsmakten over hvem som skal få komme til Amerika.
Miller kritiserer ankedomstolen som opprettholdt suspensjonen av innreiseforbudet.
MILLER: No, the Ninth Circuit has a long history of being overturned and Ninth Circuit has a long history of overreaching. We don’t have judicial supremacy in this country. We have three coequal branches of government.
The Ninth Circuit cannot confer on to a Yemeni national living in Yemen, with no status in our country a constitutional right to enter our country. Such a right to exist, Chris, that would mean every time we denied a visa to a foreign national, they can sue an American court for damages for lost benefits in terms of welfare and employment. That would be ludicrous.
Eighty million people visited this country through airports, land ports, and seaports. Of course, the president has the authority to impose moderate, necessary and sensible restrictions, including putting in place new vetting procedures to protect this country. That power was delegated to him explicitly by Congress, and adheres to him under its Article 2 powers under the U.S. Constitution.
This is a judicial usurpation of the power. It is a violation of judges’ proper roles in litigating disputes. We will fight it. And we will make sure that we take action to keep from happening in the future what’s happened in the past.
We’ve had hundreds of individuals enter the country through the immigration system on visas, who’ve gone on to do enormous harm to this country from 9/11, through San Bernardino, to the Boston bombing, in Chattanooga, and on and on and on it goes.
Miller får frem at det er snakk om to helt ulike tolkninger av prerogativer: Domstolene vil føre politikk på bekostning av presidentens makt. Men Trump og hans folk er overbevist om at dommererne driver med «judicial overreach», dvs går lenger enn de har dekning for.
Christian Tybring Gjedde hadde et innlegg i Aftenposten fredag der han påpekte at Norge pøser enorme beløp inn i et FN preget av byråkrati, ineffektivitet, hykleri og sløseri. Så kommer han med en nyhet som hadde fortjent overskrifer:
Denne vinteren har Stortinget behandlet regjeringens melding om norsk tilslutning til individklageordningene til FNs konvensjon om økonomiske, sosiale og kulturelle rettigheter, FNs barnekonvensjon og FNs konvensjon om rettigheter til mennesker med nedsatt funksjonsevne.
En tilslutning ville innebære at enkeltindivider som ikke får medhold i norske domstoler kan klage til FNs konvensjonskomiteer.
I asylsaker vil eksempelvis mindreårige asylsøkere ved nasjonalt avslag påberope seg individklageordningen i FNs Barnekonvensjon. Konvensjonen tar utgangspunkt i «barnets beste». En uttalelse fra FN vil ikke være bindende, men i praksis vil det være en forventning om at vedtaket følges opp. Og for norsk advokatstand ville slike saker være en gavepakke.
Vi har ikke bare et EU som skyver nasjonal selvråderett til side. Også FN ønsker å innføre klageordninger som vil gjøre suvereniteten illusorisk. Vestlige land blir sosialkontor for hele verden.
Obama var i ferd med å gjøre det samme med USA. Trump og hans folk er fast bestemt på å endre kurs.
Trumps fiender tror de er mange nok til å kunne blokkere. Men de sitter ikke med den executive makten. Obama styrte ved dekreter. Han har økt presidentens makt. Trump akter å bruke den.
MILLER: Right now, we are considering and pursuing all options. Those options include seeking an emergency stay with the Supreme Court, continuing the appeal with the panel, having an emergency hearing en banc, or going to the trial court in the district level and a trial on the merits. They also include, as you mentioned, the possibility of new executive actions designed to prevent terrorist infiltration of our country.
But I want to say something very clearly, and this is going to be very disappointing to the people protesting the president and the people in Congress like Senator Schumer who have attacked the president for his lawful and necessary action. The president’s powers here are beyond question. The president has the authority under the INA Section 8 U.S.C. 1182F to suspend the entry of aliens into this country.
And he has Article 2 foreign powers to also engage in conducting border control and immigration control into this country. Those powers are substantial. They present the very apex of presidential authority. And so, we are contemplating new and additional actions to ensure that our immigration system does not become a vehicle for admitting people into our country who are hostile to this nation and its values.
MILLER: An unelected judge does not have the right to remake the immigration laws and policies for the entire United States of America.
But not to get off track here, because we are going all over the place, let’s just be very clear and straightforward saying the following: The United States of America has a terrorism problem. We’ve had hundreds cases of foreign national entering our country from other countries and plotting, attempting, or even carrying out terrorist attacks. We’ve spent countless dollars a year, and we have thousands of federal officers and investigators who do nothing but run around the country trying to stop terrorist attacks for no other reason because we make the mistake of letting people in who harbor hatred for this country.
Our immigration system should not be a vehicle for admitting people who have anything but love in their hearts for this nation and this Constitution.
Mange medier sier det var Bannon og Miller som skrev innreiserestriksjons-ordren. Helt feil, sier Miller.
MILLER: First of all, people are getting way too much credit to me and Steve Bannon. Steve Bannon has no role whatsoever in drafting executive orders. This executive order was drafted by congressional experts and lawyers, career experts on immigration. It was approved and vetted through the Homeland Security Council, the National Security Council, the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel — key people at the departments and agencies were read into the executive order —
Chris Wallace som vi husker fra tredje debatt mellom Trump og Hillary, innvender at implementeringen ikke gikk så bra…
WALLACE: You would agree, it hasn’t gone smoothly.
MILLER: Well, here’s where you are wrong, Chris. And I hate to say this, because I think you are fabulous. But we issued three executive orders on immigration that have profoundly improved the security of this country, on border security, interior security, and national security.
Most of those provisions remain in full, total, and complete affect. Aspects of the national security order have been wrongly enjoined, an unprecedented step by the Ninth Circuit and the district judge to extend rights to citizens of other countries who don’t live in our country. But even parts of that executive order still remain in full effect, including the process that begins to set in place the new extreme vetting mechanisms, including the lowering of the refugee ceiling.
Så er det denne besluttsomhet som Miller viser. En overraskende sterk besluttsomhet. De er såvidt kommet i gang:
MILLER: And then the other policies.
But something is going to come out of this, which will be very good. In the end, the powers of the president of the United States will be reaffirmed, and the whole world will see clearly and unmistakably, and it’s a message that I want the world to hear today — that this country will protect its borders. It will protect its people, and it will ensure we have an immigration system that promotes wage growth, that promotes employment opportunities for our people, and importantly promotes compassion for working-class citizens who want to live in safe, secure, upperly mobile communities.
WALLACE: Let me ask about protecting the border, because there has been ramped up immigration this week, hundreds of people in the country illegally, and some with criminal records besides the fact that they came in illegally have been detained. The president tweeted this morning, «The crackdown on illegal immigrants is merely the keeping of my campaign promise. Gang members, drug dealers, and others are being removed.»
Now, the immigration officials said that this had been in the works for some period of time. The president seems to indicate that this is happening of his order. Which is it?
MILLER: Right now, as a result of the president’s order, greatly expanded and more vigorous immigration enforcement activities are taking place. It is true that operation cross-check is something that happens every year. But this year, we’ve taken new and greater steps to remove criminal aliens from our communities.
I had a phone call yesterday with someone who from DHS who talked about an immigration enforcement activity at 4:00 in the morning where a gang member was removed, a wife beater, somebody who was a threat to public safety, with a long arrest record. But because they didn’t have the right kinds of convictions, they weren’t considered a priority by the previous administration.
Because of President Trump’s actions, innocent people are now being kept out of harm’s way. And we as a country spend too little time thinking about the effects of open borders on vulnerable communities, including our migrant communities, lawful migrants trying to get their start in this country —
Hvis de liberale og venstresiden akter å solidarisere seg med at kriminelle utvises kan det være at de har en overraskelse i vente.
Obama har kun gått etter de mest alvorlige kriminelle. I virkeligheten har det betydd at krimininaliteten har bredt seg. Lokale myndigheter mister kontrollen.
De har nå en president som backer dem.