Theresa
May 'does not agree' with Donald Trump's immigration ban
PM
issues statement after causing outcry by declining to speak out
against executive order that could affect British dual nationals
Rowena Mason Deputy
political editor
Sunday 29 January
2017 01.15 GMT
Theresa May has
issued a late-night statement saying she “does not agree” with
Donald Trump’s ban on refugees and people from seven
Muslim-majority countries entering the US, after coming under intense
political pressure to condemn the order.
The prime minister
released her comments through a spokesman shortly after midnight,
saying the UK would “make representations” if British citizens
were affected by the 90-day ban on travel to the US for those from
Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria or Yemen.
“Immigration
policy in the United States is a matter for the government of the
United States, just the same as immigration policy for this country
should be set by our government,” the spokesman said.
“But we do not
agree with this kind of approach and it is not one we will be taking.
We are studying this
new executive order to see what it means and what the legal effects
are, and in particular what the consequences are for UK nationals. If
there is any impact on UK nationals then clearly we will make
representations to the US government about that.”
The statement is
unlikely to be strong enough to satisfy many of the MPs expressing
outrage about Trump’s move, which quickly caused chaos at airports.
There are already
reports that British people of dual nationality with the affected
countries are unable to travel to or through the US because of the
ban. High-profile UK nationals likely to be caught by the executive
order include Olympic gold medallist Sir Mo Farah and Conservative MP
Nadhim Zahawi.
The prime minister
is also facing questions about why she took so long to respond to the
controversy, which has soured her trip to visit Trump on Friday which
Downing Street had regarded as a success.
May initially
refused to condemn the ban on refugees and nationals of the seven
countries when asked about Trump’s order during a visit to Turkey.
After being repeatedly pressed, May would only say: “The United
States is responsible for the United States’ policy on refugees.”
Aides again refused
to elaborate on that position when May landed at Heathrow on Saturday
evening, but the position could not hold as the prime minister came
under under mounting criticism from Conservative and opposition MPs,
while other foreign governments expressed strong concerns.
Following the ban,
Zahawi, a Tory MP who was born in Iraq, said it was a “sad day for
the USA” that he would not be allowed to enter. “I’m a British
citizen & so proud to have been welcomed to this country. Sad to
hear I’ll be banned from the USA based on my country of birth,”
he tweeted.
He added that he had
had confirmation from an immigration lawyer that the order applies to
himself and his wife as they were both born in Iraq, one of the seven
countries targeted in Trump’s executive order.
Farah, who came to
the UK as a child from Somalia, trains in Oregon in the US but it is
not clear he would be able to re-enter the country if he left.
The Olympic champion
is believed to be in Ethiopia for two weeks before travelling to the
UK for competition. There has not yet been comment from his camp.
David Warburton,
Tory MP for Somerton and Frome, said the ban was “shocking,
ludicrous, appalling and insane” and made clear he wanted May to
oppose it.
James Cleverly, MP
for Braintree, also weighed in to say Trump’s “immigration and
Syrian refugee ban is indefensible, unworkable and almost certainly
unconstitutional”.
While government
ministers were initially silent, Ruth Davidson, the Scottish
Conservative leader, was one of the most senior Tories to condemn the
ban, saying it was “both wrong in itself and very worrying for the
future”.
Jeremy Corbyn, the
Labour leader, said May should have condemned Trump’s actions.
“President Trump’s executive order against refugees and Muslims
should shock and appal us all,” he said.
“Theresa May
should have stood up for Britain and our values by condemning his
actions. It should sadden our country that she chose not to.
“After Trump’s
hideous actions and May’s weak failure to condemn them, it’s more
important than ever for us to say to refugees seeking a place of
safety, that they will always be welcome in Britain.”
Donald Trump
anti-refugee order: 'green-card holders included in ban' – as it
happened
Homeland Security
reportedly confirms permanent residents will be included in temporary
ban amid widespread condemnation
Read more
The order caused
chaos on Saturday, as people who had flown to the US were held at
major airports while others were barred from boarding flights or were
pulled off planes overseas. However, the Foreign Office had no
comment or change to its travel advice as of 10pm on Saturday.
Tim Farron, the
Liberal Democrat leader, said the British government urgently needed
to give travel advice to British citizens who may be affected by the
ban. “Today Theresa May said that Donald Trump’s ban on people
from Muslim countries was purely a matter for America,” he said.
“We now learn that
the State Department apparently advises that the visa ban also
applies to people with dual nationality, which will include Britons.
“Even allowing for
her cosying up to Donald Trump, it would be a gross abdication of her
responsibilities to all British citizens if she doesn’t take this
up with her new best friend now, making clear that anyone with a
British passport and a visa should be allowed safe passage.
“She must also
order the Foreign Office to deliver urgently tonight advice to
British citizens travelling to the United States on whether they
should continue to travel.”
Trump has also
banned refugees from entering the country for 120 days and those
seeking asylum from Syria have been banned indefinitely.
Labour MP Yvette
Cooper, the chair of the Commons home affairs committee, has written
to May asking her to clarify whether she raised concerns about the
president’s approach to refugees and Muslims during their talks at
the White House on Friday.
Her letter states:
“You will understand how important it is for people in the United
Kingdom to know that when our prime minister talks on Holocaust
Memorial Day about things we have in common with the president of the
United States, you are not talking about or condoning in any way the
deeply troubling measures that president Trump has introduced,” she
said.
Federal
judge stays deportations under Trump Muslim country travel ban
ACLU
and lawyers for two Iraqis held at New York’s JFK airport celebrate
US
airports on frontline as Trump’s travel ban causes chaos and
protests
Raya Jalabi in
Brooklyn and Alan Yuhas
Sunday 29 January
2017 04.44 GMT
A federal judge has
granted a stay on deportations for people who arrived in the US with
valid visas but were detained on entry, following President Donald
Trump’s executive order to halt travel from seven Muslim-majority
countries.
The stay is only a
partial block to the broader executive order, with the judge stopping
short of a broader ruling on its constitutionality. Nevertheless, it
was an early, significant blow to the new administration.
Less than 24 hours
after two Iraqi men were detained at John F Kennedy airport in New
York on Saturday morning, Judge Ann Donnelly of the federal district
court in Brooklyn ordered an emergency stay, blocking the deportation
of any individual currently being held in airports across the United
States.
“I think the
government hasn’t had a full chance to think about this,”
Donnelly told a packed courtroom.
The American Civil
Liberties Union (ACLU) and other groups filed the lawsuit earlier on
Saturday, challenging the detention of the two Iraqi men, with two
more plaintiffs were later added to the suit, who were both valid US
green-card holders. But the judge’s ruling extended to all
individuals facing similar situations across the United States.
The two plaintiffs
included two Iraqi refugees who had spent hours detained at JFK:
Hameed Khalid Darweesh, who had worked for the US government for a
decade, and Haider Sameer Abdulkhaleq Alshawi, who arrived in the
country to join his wife, a US contractor.
Donnelly, who was
nominated by former president Barack Obama, ruled that the
deportations could cause the plaintiffs “irreparable harm” by
returning them to countries where they had been threatened. She also
noted that the plaintiffs included visa-holders who had already been
approved for entry to the US, and who, only two days before, would
have been let into the country without incident.
“Obviously, we’re
extremely pleased,” the head of the ACLU, Anthony Romero, told the
Guardian. The judge, he said, “obviously gets the importance of the
executive order and its impact on hundreds if not thousands of
immigrants and refugees.”
The stay, which
applies nationwide, will last at least until a hearing scheduled for
21 February, the judge said, and includes people on valid visas of
all kinds and green-card holders.
However, it would
only impact those who were “on American soil” – ie those who
had been mid-flight or had landed while the executive order was being
signed by the president, Romero said.
He estimated that
there were at least 100-200 people currently being held in airports
across the country, however he said the number could be higher. Asked
by the judge to confirm the number, government lawyers were unable to
respond with confidence.
Donnelly ordered the
government to provide a list of all people currently being held in
violation of the order at US airports or in flights, to protests from
the government lawyers.
“I don’t think
it’s unduly burdensome to get a list of names,” Donnelly said.
Darweesh and Alshawi
had both been released earlier on Saturday, the US attorney
confirmed, however Romero specified that Darweesh had been released
“at the discretion of the executive branch”.
Despite the stay,
however, lawyers for the plaintiffs and civil liberties advocates
drew immediate concern for the well-being of those granted a stay, as
it was widely assumed that the individuals in question would be held
in immigration detention facilities until their hearing, three weeks
away.
“It’s a long
time for people to be sitting in detention centers,” Romero said,
adding that the ACLU would be monitoring the conditions in those
facilities.
Brian Chesky, the
co-founder of Airbnb, tweeted that his company would provide “free
housing to refugees and anyone not allowed in the US”, and
suggested anyone should contact him if in urgent need for housing.
Judge Donnelly
suggested the lawyers should return to court, if the travelers were
to be placed in detention rather than be released. “I guess I’ll
just hear from you,” she said.
Earlier on Saturday,
President Trump’s executive order, signed the day before, sowed
chaos in airports, universities, corporations and living rooms in the
US and abroad, as people grappled with the ramifications of its
sometimes vague language.
Travelers were
pulled off plans or detained at checkpoints, universities urged
at-risk students not to leave the country or to seek legal advice
while tech giants recalled their workers from abroad. Throughout,
families took calls from panicked loved ones whose lives were cast
into disarray, unable to return to their homes, with everything from
cars to pets waiting where they left them.
While the ruling
gave hope to those detained on US soil, millions of people around the
world face uncertain futures. People like Farah Alkhafji, who came to
the US as a refugee from Iraq having endured the killing of her
husband, the burning of her house and the kidnapping of her father.
She was just weeks away from taking her US citizenship test.
Similarly, Hayder,
who survived multiple bomb attacks while translating for US troops
during the war in Iraq. Hayder, who has asked the Guardian not to use
his real name, has a plane ticket from Texas from Baghdad that he may
never get to use.
Shortly after
Donnelly’s ruling, a federal judge in Virginia banned the
deportation of detainees being held at Dulles International Airport,
and also ordered officials there to allow detainees to meet with
their lawyers.
Judge Leonie
Brinkema’s temporary restraining order, however, blocked
deportations for just seven days. In another case in Washington
state, federal Judge Thomas Zilly stopped the US government from
deporting two people. A hearing was set for 3 February for Zilly “to
determine whether to life the stay”.
The hearing in
Brooklyn though short, was potent, dealing the first successful legal
challenge to an administration which has barrelled aggressively
through its first week in power, implementing its draconian set of
“extreme vetting” measures.
The swift pace at
which the travel ban was drawn up was plain in the conduct of the
court. Lawyers representing the government displayed a clear lack of
information, echoing the confusion of various government agencies and
officials in the past 24 hours, who had been implementing the order
haphazardly.
“Things have
unfolded with such speed, that we haven’t had time to review the
legal situation yet,” an attorney representing the government said.
Alerted by the ACLU
to the fact that a Syrian woman with a valid US green card had been
detained upon arrival into the United States and had been placed on a
plane due to take off “back to Syria” within 30 minutes, the
judge moved swiftly to reach her conclusion.
“Apparently there
is someone being put on a plane. What do you think about that? Back
to Syria,” an increasingly frustrated Donnelly asked lawyers for
the government. She pressed them further on whether the government
could give assurances that the woman would suffer no “irreparable
harm” upon her arrival in Syria.
But Gisela
Westwater, a government lawyer who spoke to judge by phone from
Washington, simply replied that the government did not have
sufficient information about the woman or the circumstances of her
detention. “And as your honor has suggested, we all do require
additional time to have more facts.”
“Well that’s
exactly why I’m going to grant this stay,” Donnelly replied to
muffled cheers in the room. The rapt audience, filled with of civil
liberties advocates, lawyers and journalists who had tunnelled
through a crowd of protesters chanting “No hate, no fear, refugees
are welcome here”, was told by the judge to rein in their palpable
excitement.
Advertisement
A lawyer with the
ACLU later confirmed that US immigration officials were removing the
Syrian woman from the plane.
Several hundred
people waited for the verdict outside the courthouse, holding signs
and chanting “let them go!” and “We believe that we will win”.
When the verdict was announced to the crowd less than an hour later,
those gathered in the bitter cold erupted in loud cheers.
Similar protests
were replicated at more than a dozen airports around the country.
Hundreds of people gathered to demonstrate at Kennedy airport in New
York and the international ports in Los Angeles, San Francisco,
Houston, Philadelphia and other cities where people were detained and
families separated overnight. Multiple immigration lawyers were also
at airports, offering their services pro-bono to those detained.
Additional reporting
by Spencer Ackerman.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário