A Federal Appeals Court Just Said Trump's Tweets Show He's An Anti-Muslim Bigot

A Federal Appeals Court Just Said Trump's Tweets Show He's An Anti-Muslim Bigot

09 April 2018

Once again, the president's own words undermine the legal defense of his travel ban.

By Ryan J. Reilly, Huffington Post

WASHINGTON ― In an extraordinary ruling on Thursday, the majority of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit found that "the words of the President" provided "undisputed evidence" of anti-Muslim bias.

In a 9-4 ruling, the federal appeals court held that the third version of Trump's travel ban ― which limited visitors from six majority-Muslim countries as well as two other nations ― was likely unconstitutional. It was the second federal appeals court to find that Trump's third travel ban was likely unconstitutional, but both rulings have been put on hold until the U.S. Supreme Court hears oral arguments in the matter this spring.

The 4th Circuit's majority opinion, written by Chief Judge Roger Gregory, represents yet another instance in which the president's own words ― and tweets ― have hurt his arguments in court. This has happened to Trump again and again and again.

The 4th Circuit found that Trump had expressed "what any reasonable observer could view as general anti-Muslim bias." In addition to statements from the campaign trail, the opinion cited Trump's retweets of anti-Muslim videos posted by a far-right British political party in November as well as this tweet from August:

"The President's own words ― publicly stating a constitutionally impermissible reason for the Proclamation ― distinguish this case," the majority found.

While Trump could have "removed the taint of his prior troubling statements," he hasn't, the court said. "In fact, instead of taking any actions to cure the 'taint' that we found infected [the second executive order laying out a travel ban], President Trump continued to disparage Muslims and the Islamic faith," it said.

From the opinion:

Plaintiffs here do not just plausibly allege with particularity that the Proclamation's purpose is driven by anti-Muslim bias, they offer undisputed evidence of such bias: the words of the President. This evidence includes President Trump's disparaging comments and tweets regarding Muslims; his repeated proposals to ban Muslims from entering the United States; his subsequent explanation that he would effectuate this "Muslim" ban by targeting "territories" instead of Muslims directly; the issuance of [executive order 1] and [executive order 2], addressed only to majority-Muslim nations; and finally the issuance of the Proclamation, which not only closely tracks [executive order 1] and [executive order 2], but which President Trump and his advisors described as having the same goal as [executive order 1] and [executive order 2].

The Trump administration had urged the court to disregard the president's pre-election statements, perhaps the court said in "implicit recognition of the rawness of the religious animus" in those statements. But the government's argument that what he said before he was elected wasn't relevant didn't hold up, the 4th Circuit said.

"This is a difficult argument to make given that the President and his advisors have repeatedly relied on these pre-election statements to explain the President's post-election actions related to the travel ban," the court wrote.

From the opinion:

The Government does not ― and, indeed, cannot ― dispute that the President made these statements. Instead, it argues that the "statements that occurred after the issuance of [executive order 2] do not reflect any religious animus" but reflect "the compelling secular goal of protecting national security from an amply-documented present threat." We cannot agree.

Rather, an objective observer could conclude that the President's repeated statements convey the primary purpose of the Proclamation — to exclude Muslims from the United States. In fact, it is hard to imagine how an objective observer could come to any other conclusion when the President's own deputy press secretary made this connection express: he explained that President Trump tweets extremist anti-Muslim videos as part of his broader concerns about "security," which he has "addressed ... with ... the proclamation."

"In sum, the face of the Proclamation, read in the context of President Trump's official statements, fails to demonstrate a primarily secular purpose. To the objective observer, the Proclamation continues to exhibit a primarily religious anti-Muslim objective," the court wrote.

Ryan Reilly is HuffPost's senior justice reporter, covering the Justice Department, federal law enforcement, criminal justice and legal affairs. Have a tip? Reach him at ryan.reilly@huffpost.com or on Signal at 202-527-9261.

Breitbart Deletes Anti-Muslim Super Bowl Tweet For Not Meeting 'Editorial Standards'

The offensive tweet suggested that Muslim-Americans want to eliminate the Super Bowl.

By David Moye

Breitbart News deleted a racist tweet Monday that suggested the Super Bowl would become just a memory if Muslims took power.

Screenshots of the deleted tweet show it was posted at 7:25 p.m. and suggested an imaginary dialogue between a boy named "Muhammad" and his grandfather.

The link also included a photo of members of the New England Patriots kneeling and a link to an article about how people were reportedly boycotting the Super Bowl because of players refusing to stand for the national anthem.

The tweet was deleted at 9:25 a.m. Monday, at which point whoever manages Breitbart social media posted this tweet explaining (sort of) its decision.

HuffPost reached out to Breitbart to find out if the tweet violated a particular editorial policy or was just offensive across the board. No one at the website immediately responded.

Ibrahim Hooper of the Council of American-Islamic Relations declined to comment on why the deleted tweet was offensive and incorrect.

"Doing that just gives them credence," he told HuffPost. "There are very few 'media outlets' we ban ― and I use quotes when I refer to Breitbart as a media outlet, because we don't consider them a media outlet, we consider them an anti-Muslim hate group.

Breitbart has faced criticism for previous anti-Muslim remarks.

In June, Breitbart fired news editor Katie McHugh over her Islamophobic tweets after a terrorist attack in London, including one that said: "There would be no deadly terror attacks in the U.K. if Muslims didn't live there. #LondonBridge."

Trump's Islamophobic Retweets Widely Condemned By Religious Leaders

Muslims and their interfaith allies are refusing to give bigotry "a free pass."

By Carol Kuruvilla

U.S. President Donald Trump's decision to retweet the messages of a far-right and virulently anti-Muslim British activist has provoked condemnation from religious leaders on both sides of the pond.

Muslim organizations and interfaith allies spoke out on Wednesday against Trump's role in amplifying three videos shared by Britain First's deputy leader Jayda Fransen. The critics said the president's retweets gave her a much bigger platform on which to spread anti-Muslim hate.

Britain First is a fringe political party in the U.K. known for spreading hoaxes about Islam online. Although it claims to be defending Britain's Christian heritage and promoting Christian values, the anti-immigrant group has been thoroughly denounced by every major Christian denomination in the U.K.

On Wednesday, Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby, head of the Church of England, called on Trump to "remove his Britain First retweets and make clear his opposition to racism and hatred."

"It is deeply disturbing that the President of the United States has chosen to amplify the voice of far-right extremists," Welby wrote on Facebook. "Britain First seeks to divide communities and intimidate minorities, especially our Muslim friends and neighbours. Britain First does not share our values of tolerance and solidarity. God calls us as Christians to love our neighbour and seek the flourishing of all in our communities, societies and nations."

The Board of Deputies of British Jews, one of the country's leading Jewish advocacy groups, echoed Welby's call for Trump to delete his retweets.

And the Muslim Council of Britain said that Trump's retweets were the "clearest endorsement yet from the US President of the far-right and their vile anti-Muslim propaganda."

"We cannot give such bigotry a free pass," the council's statement read.

The three videos that Trump retweeted purport to show Muslims committing violent and anti-Christian acts. Fransen's tweet claimed that one of the videos depicted a Muslim migrant beating up a Dutch boy on crutches. The Dutch Embassy in Washington, D.C., discredited that claim, confirming in a tweet that the attacker was born and raised in the Netherlands. The two other videos appear to be from Syria and Egypt in 2013 and show the actions of violent political extremists.

The videos are part of Britain First's long-running campaign to stoke fears about Muslims and conflate the ideology of extremists with the way that the vast majority of the world's 1.8 billion Muslims practice their faith. Fransen herself was convicted in 2016 of religiously aggravated harassment against a Muslim woman.

Muslim and interfaith allies in the U.S. have also criticized the retweets, warning they could encourage those who seek to harm Muslim Americans.

The Anti-Defamation League released a statement arguing that Trump's retweets are just another example of how he continually provides "his millions of followers a gateway into the world of extremism, hatred and anti-Semitism." Jonathan Greenblatt‏, CEO of the Jewish advocacy organization, said this kind of anti-Muslim propaganda will "embolden bigots in the US and abroad."

Father James Martin, a Jesuit priest and editor at large of America magazine, compared the president's tweets to tactics used by the Nazis to increase division and foment hatred against Jews.

Other interfaith allies in the U.S. also chimed in on Twitter.

Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said Trump's actions put "the lives and safety of American Muslim children and families at risk."

"Hate speech leads to hate crimes. When hate speech and conspiracy theories against American minorities go unchallenged, they foster an atmosphere that causes hate crimes," Awad warned.

Trump wasn't living up to his promise to be a president for all Americans, said Salam Al-Marayati, president of the Muslim Public Affairs Council.

"You can't claim to be a President for all Americans if you scapegoat any group of Americans. In fact, you can't claim to be President at all if you promote conspiracy theories about any minority," Al-Marayati said in a statement. "If moral leadership will not come from the White House, we will need others ― religious leaders, political leaders, and everyday Americans ― to step up and condemn this behavior and fill the gap."

Add Comments