Tag Archives: Tommy Pigott

Macon Telegraph: Trump Suffers Legal Blow Over Travel Ban

Posted on by
Reply

U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan has ruled that the State Department may not use the Trump-era travel ban to deny immigrant visas to applicants whose cases were placed on hold under the policy. The administration has claimed judicial overreach, while immigration attorneys have urged a less restrictive review. The ruling directs the State Department to process affected visas without invoking the ban.

Immigration attorney Curtis Morrison stated, “Now, let’s hope when it’s time for the Trump administration to review the ban at the 90-day mark they do that in good faith, and it leads to a less restrictive ban that will allow plaintiffs with issued immigrant visas to immigrate the US and start their lives here.”

State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott said, “Another example of wrongful judicial overreach aimed at curtailing this Administration’s strong and unwavering efforts to keep Americans and our communities safe.”

Let me fix that for you: You’ll continue your strong and unwavering efforts to abuse immigrants and to make a mockery of the rule of law.

Pigott added, “We will continue to relentlessly work to ensure the President of the United States is able to use every tool he has available, including visas, to finally bring oversight to who we allow to visit our country.”

Sooknanan noted that the legal framework for the travel ban does not allow the State Department to reject visas outright. The Trump administration has maintained the measures are necessary for national security.

Sooknanan wrote, “That provision authorizes the President, subject to specified limitations, to ‘suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.’”

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) retains authority to deny entry to visa holders, further limiting immigration options. The State Department is now under pressure to process applications prior to the September 30, 2025 fiscal deadline.

Trump Suffers Legal Blow Over Travel Ban

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-suffers-legal-blow-over-travel-ban/ss-AA1LvWSS

Latin Times: Rubio’s Contradicting Arguments on Birthright Citizenship Resurface as Supreme Court Weighs Trump Order Looking to Restrict it

Posted on by
Reply

Rubio’s comments came amid a lawsuit challenging his eligibility to run for president on the grounds that, as the son of Cuban immigrants who became U.S. citizens only after his birth

A new report has revealed that Secretary of State Marco Rubio argued in a federal court filing in 2016 that the Constitution guarantees citizenship to nearly all children born in the United States regardless of their parents’ immigration status when he was a Republican senator running for president, a position that now stands in sharp contrast to the executive order issued by Trump in January which seeks to restrict birthright citizenship.

Rubio’s 2016 filing responded to a lawsuit challenging his eligibility to run for president on the grounds that, as the son of Cuban immigrants who became U.S. citizens only after his birth, he was not a “natural born citizen.”

As The New York Times points out, the court dismissed the case, but Rubio’s arguments went further than necessary, affirming that the 14th Amendment was designed to ensure that “all persons born in the United States, regardless of race, ancestry, previous servitude, etc., were citizens of the United States.”

Rubio went on to say that the amendment, the common law on which it was based and the leading Supreme Court precedent all confirmed that “persons born in the United States to foreign parents (who were not diplomats or hostile, occupying enemies) were citizens of the United States by virtue of their birth.”

Trump’s executive order, by contrast, states that children born in the U.S. are not automatically citizens if their mothers were either unlawfully present or only in the country on a temporary basis and if their fathers were neither U.S. citizens nor lawful permanent residents. The order has been blocked in lower courts, but the administration has asked the Supreme Court to take up the issue this fall.

Peter J. Spiro, a citizenship law expert at Temple University, told the NYT that Rubio’s earlier arguments remain significant and that “there’s no reason why the argument he put to work in 2016 couldn’t be put to work today against the Trump executive order.” Rubio, now secretary of state, oversees the implementation of immigration and passport laws.

Tommy Pigott, a State Department spokesman, dismissed the focus on Rubio’s past filing, saying he is “100 percent aligned with President Trump’s agenda,” and claiming that “it’s absurd the NYT is even wasting time digging around for decade-old made-up stories.”

Rubio has faced backlash for his contrasting stances on issues affecting immigrants in the past few months, especially Latinos. A group called Keep Them Honest erected signs in May accusing him of betraying Venezuelans after supporting the administration’s move to end Temporary Protected Status. Rubio, once a leading Republican advocate for TPS, has recently called the designation harmful to U.S. interests and linked it to security threats.

Rubio’s Contradicting Arguments on Birthright Citizenship Resurface as Supreme Court Weighs Trump Order Looking to Restrict it
Rubio’s comments came amid a lawsuit challenging his eligibility to run for president on the grounds that, as the son of Cuban immigrants who became U.S. citizens only after his birth

https://www.latintimes.com/rubios-contradicting-arguments-birthright-citizenship-resurface-supreme-court-weighs-trump-order-588498