Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

altmuslim

Home
Muslim
Trump, Interment Camps and Muslim Bans – an FAQ

Trump, Interment Camps and Muslim Bans – an FAQ

Last updated on: November 30, 2016 at 6:12 pm by Guest Contributor

Trump, Interment Camps and Muslim Bans – an FAQ 2016-11-30T18:12:24-04:00 Guest Contributor

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Barracks from the Japanese Relocation Center and are now furnishing housing for farm labor on Bryant Williams farm in Klamath County, Oregon. By OSU Special Collections & Archives : Commons – Barracks from Japanese American Internment Camp, No restrictions, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=28069650

By Maureen Pettibone Ryan

Donald J. Trump has made several statements during his campaign that have given rise to concerns about civil rights in America, particularly for minority groups such as Muslim Americans.

This essays serves as a starting point to address the constitutionality of Mr. Trump’s proposed policies regarding Muslims.

Much of this discussion is theoretical. The policies espoused by Mr. Trump have no precedent in the past sixty to seventy years, if not longer. In law school, we never discussed or debated these types of policies, because no one believed that such laws would be passed in our modern era.

MUSLIM BAN

Can President Trump ban Muslims from entering the United States? Does it matter if they are citizens, permanent residents, green card holders, immigrants, or visitors?

Mr. Trump has made a number of conflicting statements about barring Muslims from the United States. Initially, Mr. Trump appeared to propose a complete (but temporary) ban of all Muslims from entering the United States. This ban was never clearly described, but could have been interpreted as including Muslim citizens, lawful permanent residents, immigrants and visitors alike. (Incidentally, Mr. Trump’s own running mate, Governor Mike Pence, decried the ban, calling it “offensive and unconstitutional.”)

Mr. Trump’s controversial statement advocating such a ban was removed from his campaign website on November 9, 2016. Currently, Mr. Trump’s website states that he will temporarily suspend immigration from regions that “have a history of exporting terrorism.” This is a much narrower ban, and appears to apply only to new immigrants.

A Muslim ban that included U.S. citizens would likely be found unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, which protect free exercise of religion and require that all citizens are entitled to equal protection of the laws, respectively.

For Muslims non-citizens, the law is less clear because they do not have all of the same constitutional rights as citizens. Furthermore, the U.S. Government has what is known as “plenary power,” or complete and total authority, to make decisions regarding immigration and entry into the United States.

The U.S. did ban all Chinese people from immigrating to the U.S. from 1882-1943, despite the fact that racial minorities, like religious groups, are entitled to “equal protection of the law” under the Fourteenth Amendment. These “Chinese Exclusion Laws” are often viewed as a dark time in American history, and were condemned by Congress in 2011-2012. Unfortunately, these laws were ruled to be constitutional in 1889 by the United States Supreme Court, and were not repealed until 1943. I believe these laws would be rejected today, but there is no legal precedent declaring such laws unconstitutional.

In summary, Muslims who are U.S. citizens would likely be exempt from any Muslim ban, temporary or otherwise. Non-citizens could be banned based on Congress’s “plenary authority” to regulate immigration, but if such a ban were explicitly based on religion, it might give rise to a constitutional challenge that could deal the Trump administration a resounding defeat.

An excellent argument that a Muslim ban would not be legal, written for lawyers, can be found here.

MUSLIM REGISTRY

Can Muslims be forced to register with the government?

Mr. Trump and his surrogates have made several inconsistent statements about whether they would implement a “database” to register Muslims. Initially, Mr. Trump seemed to support a registry of all Muslims, and this week, a surrogate named Carl Higbie argued that such a registry was Constitutional under the cases that legalized Japanese internment during World War II.

Sadly, Mr. Higbie is not entirely wrong. Korematsu has never been overruled, although even conservative Supreme Court Justices, such as the late Antonin Scalia, considered the decision a disgrace on par with the ruling that slavery was legal.

Following September 11, many Muslim immigrants were forced to register due to immigrating from, or traveling to, 25 specific countries, 24 of which were Muslim-majority. This program was ended in 2011, but could probably be lawfully reinstated. However, the program was deeply unpopular, and if reinstated, could give rise to civil rights lawsuits or affect the 2018 mid-term elections, which the Trump Administration may wish to avoid.

MOSQUE SHUT-DOWN

Can the places of religious worship, such as mosques, be shut down by the government?

Mr. Trump advocated “shutting down” mosques in 2015, which even Rep. Peter King believes is unconstitutional. The right to free exercise of religion is protected by the First Amendment, and shutting down mosques because they are Muslim places of worship would violate the First Amendment.

NIQAB / HIJAB BANS

Can attire favored by certain Muslims, such as modest dress, the hijab, the niqab, or other religious attire be banned?

Unfortunately, the answer to this question is, it’s complicated. The law is still evolving on this issue. The United States Supreme Court interpreted Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to require employers to accommodate Muslim employees’ religion and permit them to wear a headscarf, even if it violates a neutral dress code.

However, Muslim women have been required to remove headscarves and other religious garb for a variety of reasons, including in driver’s license photos, in court, or when visiting incarcerated relatives.

Recently, Georgia State Representative Jason Spencer proposed a bill to ban veiling for women drivers and in drivers’ license photographs. Under public pressure, Rep. Spencer withdrew the bill, stating that he believed it would withstand legal, but not political, scrutiny. This is heartening, because it shows that even in the current political climate, elected officials will change course based on public outcry.

INTERNMENT CAMPS

Could the United States government place Muslims in internment camps?

As discussed briefly above, the Supreme Court has never overturned the court cases which held that it was legal to intern Japanese-Americans, including citizens, during World War II. However, Korematsu is deeply disfavored, so much so that President Ronald Reagan passed a bill through Congress that paid reparations to Japanese-Americans who were interned, and included a formal apology.

In 2012, a lawsuit was filed that could have led to Korematsu being overruled*.* The lawsuit, Hedges v. Obama, sought to overturn a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act that permitted the U.S. Government to indefinitely detain people associated with Al Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case, and so Korematsu, and the NDAA remain in place.

Interning citizens (and even non-citizens) based on religion is so inimical to the values of this country that it is hard to imagine that a modern court would approve such an internment, or that a modern polity would tolerate it.

Maureen Pettibone Ryan practices general civil litigation in San Jose, California. She focuses on business litigation, employment and civil rights, representing sexual abuse victims, and education law. She attended the United States Air Force Academy and Santa Clara University for undergrad, and obtained her law degree from the University of Michigan Law School. This article originally appeared in Altmuslimah, which is not affiliated with Altmuslim.

Previous Post

November 25, 2016

What Routes will Muslim Communities be Charting in a Trump Administration?

Next Post

December 6, 2016 Open Letter from 300+ American Muslims to President-Elect Trump

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2012 Elections 30 Dayd 30 Writers (2017) 30 Days 30 Writers 30 Days 30 Writers (2015) 30 Days 30 Writers (2016) 30 Days 30 Writers (2018) 30 Days 30 Writers 2017 Ali Asadullah Ali Eteraz Alper Bilgili Arthur Richards Asides Asma Uddin Black History Month Briefings Charles Turner Commentary Cyrus McGoldrick Eman H Aly Fatimah Popal Hajj Hajj and Dhul Hijjah Hesham Hassaballa Hisham Hellyer Ibrahim Abusharif Inas Younis Irfan Yusuf Jalal Baig Junaid Afeef Laila Alawa Laila Alwala Mas'ood Cajee Muqtedar Khan Nakia Jackson Newsmakers Parvez Ahmed Podcasts Rabia Chaudry Rafia Zakaria Ramadan Reviews Safiyyah Ally Saud Inam Shahed Amanullah Svend White The Opinionated Oncologist Visions Wajahat Ali Zahed Amanullah Zahir Janmohamed Zainab Khan

Select a Month November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 October 2002 September 2002 August 2002 July 2002 June 2002 May 2002 April 2002 March 2002

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

How many people were saved from Sodom?

Select your answer to see how you score.

4 5 6 3