On January 27, 2017, CLINIC reacted to President Trump’s Executive Order which imposes a travel ban on seven Muslim-majority countries — and shared the impact it has had so far. The CLINIC statement is entitled “Refugee order closes door to vulnerable refugees.”
Here is an excerpt:
“At a time when war and persecution have driven more people to flee in search of safety than any other time in modern history, we need to protect refugees rather than reject them out of misplaced fear,” said Jeanne Atkinson, executive director of CLINIC. Among other effects, the order would halt the refugee resettlement program for 120 days, reduce by more than half the number of refugees resettled in 2017 to 50,000, suspend the resettlement of Syrian refugees, and suspend immigration from several Muslim majority countries. “We call for the administration to protect refugees of all faiths and reject the idea of limiting resettlement of our Muslim brothers and sisters. We must continue our policy of protecting the most vulnerable refugees,” Atkinson said. “Operating out of fear does not serve the nation’s interests. In fact, refugee resettlement serves the nation’s security interests. In addition to intellect, ambition, and an ethic of hard work, refugees often bring language and cultural skills needed by our national security agencies.”
Read the entire statement, “Refugee order closes door to vulnerable refugees,” click HERE.
Last Tuesday, the Catholic Legal Immigration Network (CLINIC) and 361 other civil rights, immigration, and community groups filed an amicus (friend-of-the-court) brief with the US Supreme Court in United States v. Texas.
The brief outlines the legal arguments for lifting the lower court’s injunction blocking President Obama’s executive actions announced in 2014. The executive orders would allow limited protections against deportation and grant a two year work permit for parents of US Citizens and permanent residents. This program is referred to DAPA. In addition the executive actions would extend protections and grant a two year work permit to students who were not initially eligible under DACA1. As a member of CLINIC and advocate for family unification, LUM is encouraged by the legal arguments presented in the brief and hopeful that the Supreme Court will overturn the 5th Circuit Court’s decision allowing the implementation of DAPA and DACA2. The coalition gave the following rational for filing the brief:
“If the injunction is lifted, many families will be more secure, without the looming threat that loved ones will be deported at a moment’s notice. Many deserving individuals will also have access to better jobs and the ability to improve their lives, the lives of their families, and their communities.”
The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in United States v. Texas on April 18. To read the Amicus brief (PDF) filed by CLINIC and its coalition partners in its entirety, click HERE.