Muslim American activists and organizations deeply upset over the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision Tuesday to uphold President Donald Trump’s travel ban are now reminding us all of the fallibility of the Court by invoking its past discriminatory rulings.
Particularly those that sanctioned discrimination against minority groups such as African-Americans and Japanese-Americans. Activists have pledged to continue to fight the ruling and what they see as "bigotry" on the part of the current administration.
Linda Sarsour, executive director of the Muslim-led social justice organization MPower Change, told Huff Post:
The Supreme Court has been wrong on major decisions before, and so our fight continues. The right to live in peace and be treated justly no matter one’s race, ethnicity or religion is too important to let one person, one decision, destroy it.
This is the third iteration of Trump's travel ban, all of which have been challenged in court. The latest, a presidential proclamation issued in September, restricted immigration from eight countries ― Iran, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Chad (which has since been removed), Venezuela and North Korea. SCOTUS conservative justices maintain that the travel ban is not specifically a "Muslim ban," because even though 6 of the 8 countries included are predominantly Muslim they house “just 8 percent of the world’s Muslim population.”
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the travel ban is:
...facially neutral toward religion...quite apart from any religious hostility.
Many still consider the travel ban to be a Muslim ban citing Trump’s December 2015 call:
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has referred to the travel policy as “Muslim Ban 3.0” and many are likening Tuesday’s decision to the 1857 Dred Scott v. Sandford case (in which the Supreme Court held that black Americans “had no rights which the white man was bound to respect,”) and the Court’s 1944 Korematsu v. United States ruling (which okayed internment camps for Japanese-Americans during World War II).
According to HuffPost, Albert Fox Cahn, CAIR-NY’s legal director said:
Like its predecessors Dredd Scott and Korematsu, today’s decision was unjust. And like its predecessors, this ruling will be condemned by future generations as a betrayal of the promise of equality and justice for all.
Muslim activists and organizations are denouncing the ban, including protesters from 24 different advocacy groups who gathered outside the Supreme Court.
CAIR’s national executive director, Nihad Awad said in a statement:
The Muslim Ban’s bigotry should have been as clear to the Supreme Court as it is to the Muslims demonized by it. Apparently, everyone but the Supreme Court can see the decision for what it is: an expression of animosity.
Many turned out in person and online in support of protesting of the ban:
More From Guacamoley
Impulsive senator grabs phone — and receives internet's righteous scorn.
But the State Department is to blame.
Aren't there better things to be working on right now?
Us Americans don't necessarily understand royal protocol.