News


Stanford student sues over immigration ban

Lawsuit: order is 'thinly veiled' attempt to discriminate against Muslims

A Yemeni Stanford University freshman and two other California students filed a lawsuit Thursday against President Donald Trump, alleging his recent immigration ban is discriminatory and violates the First Amendment.

The lawsuit, which was filed on behalf of the students by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Northern California, alleges Trump's executive order to ban entry into the U.S. citizens from seven predominantly Muslim countries is a discriminatory attempt to "fulfill a campaign promise to ban Muslims from entering the United States."

The lawsuit also challenges a Jan. 27 Department of State letter that provisionally revoked most valid nonimmigrant and immigrant visas of nationals from the seven countries.

The executive order and letter are "violate the First Amendment because they are thinly veiled attempts to discriminate against Muslims by barring them from entry to the United States," the lawsuit states.

Stanford student Hadil Al-Mowafak, a Yemeni national, is the first plaintiff named in the complaint. She has been in the United States on a F-1 student visa since September, according to the lawsuit. She plans to travel to Yemen this summer to visit her husband, who lives there and does not have a U.S. visa.

"In addition to being unable to travel to see her husband, Plaintiff Al-Mowafak fears that if she is not permitted to re-enter the United States because of the Executive Order and its implementation, she will be prevented from continuing her undergraduate studies," the lawsuit states. "She is also fearful about the effects of the Provisional Revocation Letter on her immigration status.

Other plaintiffs include a 23-year-old San Diego college student, also from Yemen, who has been unable to return to the United States after leaving earlier this month to visit family in Saudi Arabia, and an anonymous Iranian University of California, Berkeley (Cal) graduate student who fears post-graduate work authorization he has secured to work at a Silicon Valley company will be jeopardized by the executive order.

The ACLU and Jewish Family & Community Services East Bay brought the lawsuit on behalf of these students and all people who are nationals of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria or Yemen who currently are, or recently have been, lawfully present in California and who, save the executive order, would be able to travel to or leave and return to the United States.

"The federal government has made it clear that it intends to favor Christian immigrants over Muslims in making decisions about who to detain, interrogate, deport, or entirely refuse entry," Julia Mass, senior staff attorney for the ACLU of Northern California, said in a statement. "We are a diverse society. American Muslims, immigrants and U.S.-born alike, are part of the fabric of this nation."

Related content:

Stanford joins universities in challenging Trump's travel ban

Appeals court to hear Trump administration's bid to reinstate travel ban

County files suit over president's executive order

Palo Alto man helps Afghan interpreter receive visa

Stanford: Trump immigration ban 'deeply antithetical' to university values

Santa Clara County to file lawsuit against President Trump's order

---

Follow the Palo Alto Weekly/Palo Alto Online on Twitter @PaloAltoWeekly and Facebook for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.

What is democracy worth to you?
Support local journalism.

Comments

41 people like this
Posted by Think Again
a resident of Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Feb 3, 2017 at 6:39 pm

I fully disagree on six of the seven countries in his ban. The ONLY one that is probably valid is the ban on people from Yemen...

Yemen is the HOTTEST of the terrorist hotbeds. It is where a large majority of terrorists are trained in highly organized boot camps.

Both ISIS and al-Qaeda, among other terrorist factions, train terrorists there.

Keep abreast of the news, this has been reported on for the last four years!


43 people like this
Posted by Semper Fi
a resident of Community Center
on Feb 3, 2017 at 7:28 pm

@Think Again

I agree. Yemen. Like that's not a hotbed of terrorism, training camps and all. The Yemeni student should be grateful she is allowed to study at Stanford, an institution out of reach of most Americans. She came here to study. She should make a sacrifice and stay here for four years and complete her BA/BS. But something tells me she is from the Yemeni elite or "establishment" and has no idea how most Yemenis really live or there troubles. Gratefulness and sacrifice. What out-dated concepts. She owes it to her country, and ours, to get over it. No snowflakes in Yemen.


28 people like this
Posted by a weird new reality
a resident of Palo Alto High School
on Feb 4, 2017 at 8:29 am

Clever twisting of words and situations:
Please discern between legal immigrants and illegal immigrants. These are matters of fact.
Please agree our country has a system of laws and procedures/practices for those who apply to enter (and/or) stay in this country, for various reasons. Sometimes there are delays, well justified insight of the potential danger to citizens and legal residents here, who take priority in this situation.
Please agree those trying to enter have a wide range of backgrounds and motivations. This has nothing per se to do with racial backgrounds. However, as a sovereign country we absolutely have the right to examine those attempting to enter this country and turn back those who illegally try to enter outside of our legal system. I could care less about the stated "motivation."
OK, so we are "required" to let anyone and everyone - equally - enter (and stay) in this country? I don't agree. The world is a dangerous place, those who claim to be "refugees" have often been found to be economic travelers, searching, for example, to get to England by passing through EU, getting papers or passports. In Europe, it is known that many travelers are unclear about where they are from and where they are going and what their intentions are. The United States is not obligated to prioritize those outside this country and/or non-citizens over the interests (and taxpayer dollars) of legal citizens and legal residents of the United States. I am amused at the twisting of words, and the situation, to frame each and every demand to enter this country as a "refugee" situation (generally without justification and evidence); we all know there are thousands and thousands of people leaving North Africa because they can't stand the place, which is understandable, but the well-known deception to get into the place (far, far away) that is most desirable -- often, the UK for their taxpayer paid benefits is cynical and must be stopped. I am all for the Red Cross and Red Crescent helping ANY people in distress, including general economic distress, at or near where they live.I am not for placing the false "rights" of any unknown person in this world to enter our country. Try that in most other countries of the world and see the reaction you get from border authorities. We have a right to a systematic, legal system for people to APPLY to legally enter and immigrate, and if there are delays, that's because this country is seen as desirable for a multitude of reasons, but is not a reason to throw up our hands and admit anyone under (sometimes) false names and identities! Those who defend law breakers because they claim "they don't have any!" (papers, identification), well, who knows, but so what? Then they can stay in their own region of the world. This country provides many many millions in humanitarian support all over the world, and this can continue.


32 people like this
Posted by Sanctimonious City
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Feb 4, 2017 at 6:49 pm

Spot on Devil Dog.

The global elites destroy their own country with nepotism and kleptocracy. When the Houthis peasants rise up, turn to fundamentalist Islam and run them out of the country they flee here to commiserate with their fellow country looters.

The reason the Arab street hates us is not because we deny them visas. It is because we sponsor, harbor and defend the apostate ruling classes that oppress them.


7 people like this
Posted by Curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Feb 5, 2017 at 5:14 pm

"The reason the Arab street hates us is not because we deny them visas. It is because we sponsor, harbor and defend the apostate ruling classes that oppress them."

It's both. The American elites sponsor, harbor and defend the apostate ruling classes that oppress their citizens, while refusing shelter to the oppressed classes.


17 people like this
Posted by Not the only
a resident of Mountain View
on Feb 5, 2017 at 6:38 pm

Refuse to shelter? Since when? We have rarely refused to shelter, we have almost always taken those in need. Or perhaps you're speaking of all those ARA countries who are refusing to shelter their own?

Even now we are not refusing to shelter anyone permanently. Some may have to wait a bit longer but we haven't said we're refusing anyone forever.

But go ahead and turn it into that, twist it up and rage hysteric.


2 people like this
Posted by Not the only
a resident of Mountain View
on Feb 5, 2017 at 6:40 pm

ARA should read Arab


5 people like this
Posted by Curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Feb 5, 2017 at 7:01 pm

"Or perhaps you're speaking of all those ARA[B] countries who are refusing to shelter their own?"

Nope, I'm referring to Donald J. Trump's America. Check out the news of the past week.


14 people like this
Posted by @conflicted
a resident of Community Center
on Feb 5, 2017 at 10:22 pm

Clearly the ban (even in a temporary form) will cause a lot of hardship to innocent people. But I also see some hypocrisy in the related protestations staged in the cities and airports. I wonder why the the same people did not come out after many atrocities in Syria, Iran, Yemen etc. committed by the local Islamic clerics and fanatics. Even now in some key functioning Islamic countries including Saudi and Iran, the court system deliberates without effective defense attorneys. Basically, you are sent to dungeon just by saying something that may offend the Islamic traditions. Whereas in the current environment, Trump is perhaps a deserving but easy target for the protesters.


19 people like this
Posted by Not the only
a resident of Mountain View
on Feb 6, 2017 at 9:51 am

I'm sorry, I must be missing your point? What about Trumps last week has stated there is a permanent ban on refugees i.e. oppressed classes?


5 people like this
Posted by Curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Feb 6, 2017 at 12:35 pm

"Even now in some key functioning Islamic countries including Saudi and Iran, the court system deliberates without effective defense attorneys. Basically, you are sent to dungeon just by saying something that may offend the Islamic traditions. Whereas in the current environment, Trump is perhaps a deserving but easy target for the protesters."

Do your homework, learn the non-alternate facts, and don't be so credulous. Saudi Arabia, supplier of 15 of the 9/11 terrorists, is not included in Trump's ban. Trump has business interests in Saudi Arabia. Making money for The Donald trumps pretense of concerns for your safety.


13 people like this
Posted by Safety first
a resident of College Terrace
on Feb 6, 2017 at 12:45 pm

When we travel with airplanes, the pre-flight safety briefings instruct us "put on your oxygen mask, then assist children with theirs". When it comes to our country's safety, it should be the same.


7 people like this
Posted by Not the only
a resident of Mountain View
on Feb 6, 2017 at 1:25 pm

Once again you are conveniently twisting words and not answering directly. Where in the last week of Trumps actions has there been a permanent ban of those "oppressed"?


1 person likes this
Posted by Jake
a resident of Crescent Park
on Feb 6, 2017 at 1:35 pm

[Post removed.]


4 people like this
Posted by Poor Girl!
a resident of Professorville
on Feb 6, 2017 at 2:51 pm

[Post removed.]


5 people like this
Posted by resident
a resident of Charleston Meadows
on Feb 6, 2017 at 5:10 pm

The ban for 90 days is specific to problem countries that do not have sufficient ability to screen the passengers pre-flight. The Arab countries have superior screening ability since they are rich countries and vulnerable to terrorism. It is a matter of process and logistical equipment. Some countries have the right equipment and some don't. All countries are not equal in their ability to function in the modern world. Many countries that are Muslim are not on the list because they have the modern equipment for pre-flight review. They also have a process for processing passports and equipment to identify people on the no-fly lists. The seven countries listed are behind the 8-ball when it comes to the identification of problem passengers. It is basic stuff from our point of view but eludes some other countries.


3 people like this
Posted by Curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Feb 6, 2017 at 5:24 pm

"Many countries that are Muslim are not on the list because they have the modern equipment for pre-flight review."

Nice try, but no cigar. Refugee vetting and airport pre-boarding screening are entirely wholly totally different things.


12 people like this
Posted by Amiga
a resident of Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Feb 6, 2017 at 6:04 pm

I agree with Semper Fi! This Yemeni girl is probably one of the elites of Yemen, and it would be dangerous for her to return home with a Civil War going on, in addition to all the terrorist activity.

She should be thankful to be here and that she is safe!

She came from a hell-hole, and is very lucky to have gotten into Stanford!

Count your blessings, girl, and don't look a gift Horse in the mouth!


2 people like this
Posted by resident
a resident of Charleston Meadows
on Feb 6, 2017 at 7:48 pm

Curmudgeon - I have been to an eastern European country and the visa process with a valid passport takes place before you get to any airport. It is effected through a consulate for the country in question. They provide the visa for the visit which is inserted into your passport. They know when you plan on flying and when you will return. They know who is sponsoring your visit. They know where you plan on staying. In order to get on the plane all of your paperwork has to be in place and approved. When you get to the departure airport it has to review your passport or you do not get on the plane. And when you land in the country the same process takes place. Your information is on the computer for that flight, it is on the consulate computer. The destination airport where I landed was brand new and beautiful. Everything was top flight throughout the whole airport experience.
It is not a bunch of people running around the airport trying to get on a plane or some backwater place. Those seven countries cannot track people from origin to destination with any trained capability. People have to recognize that different countries have different capabilities. It is like all of the dead people that got to vote - their relatives are still getting the social security checks.


Like this comment
Posted by Not the only
a resident of Mountain View
on Feb 6, 2017 at 8:14 pm

[Post removed.]


Like this comment
Posted by resident
a resident of Charleston Meadows
on Feb 6, 2017 at 8:25 pm

[Post removed.]


1 person likes this
Posted by Curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Feb 6, 2017 at 9:41 pm

"Curmudgeon - I have been to an eastern European country and the visa process ..."

Wrong pew, wrong church.


7 people like this
Posted by Sanctimonious City
a resident of Barron Park
on Feb 6, 2017 at 10:37 pm

Sanctimonious City is a registered user.

I am glad Curmudgeon brought up the point about business interests and who benefits from open borders and globalism. It is the progressive global elite not Trump.

The Wall Street Fat Cats want access to markets to exploit the masses and then skim fees as the Kleptocrats launder their ill gotten gains through shell companies in Panama or scams like the now defunct Clinton Global Initiative. I guess the oil sheiks, 3rd world plutocrats and tinpot dictators did not really care about all the starving kids in Africa after all. They are apparently pulling their money out faster than a central valley bullet train to nowhere now that there are no more Democrats in power to peddle their interests.

Then there are the "Pompous celibates" at the universities who want to avoid paying a living wage and benefits to their teaching staff. They guarantee a supply of international PHDs to do the dirty work through non-tenure positions, provide a sanctuary for their friends as guest lecturers as they await their next political appointment or board seat and get coveted summer positions in exotic locations in exchange for looking the other way in admissions for their counterpart's children.

Lastly, we have the H1B Visas program so cherished by Silicon Valley social set and the multinational corporations. It bundles the visas and gives them to low cost IT service companies like Tata, InfoSys and Wipro so the US can offshore hundreds of thousands of jobs while forcing the pink slipped to train their replacements.

Additionally, there is the "irreplaceable talent" that are brought in country like indentured servants for $65K a year. A 21st century version of a digital sweat shop, they toil endlessly on a below market salary and above average workload. They desperately cling to their sponsoring company hoping that they don't get fired or burned out before they get their green card. All the while, the execs offer two-fer specials to fire one headcount in the US and hire two in India or China and then make millions in stock by passing off the cost of displaced US workers to the taxpayer.

So if we follow the money it is obvious why the left is already howling about any restrictions, no matter how small, on open borders even for legitimate national security reasons. It is impacting their livelihood they make off the backs of others.


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

All your news. All in one place. Every day.

Su Hong Palo Alto's last day of business will be Sept. 29
By Elena Kadvany | 13 comments | 4,372 views

Electric Buses: Challenges and Opportunities
By Sherry Listgarten | 22 comments | 2,702 views

Troubling safety issues in our fair city
By Diana Diamond | 16 comments | 1,333 views

Natural Wines?
By Laura Stec | 1 comment | 940 views

Premarital, Women Over 50 Do Get Married
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 864 views

 

Register now!

On Friday, October 11, join us at the Palo Alto Baylands for a 5K walk, 5K run, 10K run or half marathon! All proceeds benefit local nonprofits serving children and families.

More Info