Thread by @mbmdeen

*THREAD* re: the #SupremeCourtNominee of Amy Coney - It's unacceptable to attack a nominee simply because of their religious beliefs, or that they are perceived to be religious, and I wish that Coney followed what #PopeFrancis preached, however, her record shows otherwise.

A recent case that she heard hits close to home for me.

Yemeni-American Zahoor Ahmed applied for a visa to for his wife Yafai, and their two children. The application was done so correctly and the process was followed as required by USCIS.

The consular office denied the application, because they claimed that Yafai “attempted to smuggle two children into the United States using the identities Yaqub Mohsin Yafai and Khaled Mohsin Yafai.” There is indication why the officer that interviewed felt that they were hers.

Brothers Yaqub and Khaled tragically drowned while waiting in Yemen. However, since the mother was accused of attempting to smuggle her children, she still had to go through the process of proving herself innocent so that she can join her husband in the United States.

After providing evidence to the consulate to prove that Yaqub and Khaled were indeed both Yemeni-American Zahoor and his wife Yafai's children, the consular affirmed his decision to deny the visa. Zahoor appealed the decision to the courts.

The evidence used was: “vaccination records..., school records for the older deceased child, prenatal care and ultrasound records, publications concerning the drowning, a passport for the older deceased child, and complete family photos prior to the children’s deaths.”

A panel of three Federal judges received the case, and in order for the case to be heard, two would have to agree.

Amy Coney and a second judge decided that the case will not be heard. The third judge, Reagan appointee Kenneth Ripple vehemently disagreed.

#AmyBarrett responded it didn't matter that their's no evidence of smuggling, nor that there's evidence that Yaqub and Khaled were their's, and the officer could've blatantly lied, but since he cited the anti-smuggling statue, the decision was “facially legitimate and bona fide."

Reagan-appointee Kenneth Ripple who strongly dissented from the decision stated that #AmyConeyBarrett’s judgment showed “no respect for the Constitution or Congress.”

Kenneth Ripple wrote: "Here, in a case where the Government asserts no national security interest and where the important familial rights of an American citizen are at stake,..."

"...the Government asks us to rubber stamp the consular decision on the basis of a conclusory [a legal term meaning “stated as a fact without being proven”] assertion."

(continued below)

"Congress has tasked us, by statute, with the responsibility to prevent arbitrary and capricious government action, we look the other way despite the significant record evidence to refute the Government’s assertion and no suggestion that the consular officer even considered it."

"Congress did not, and would not, sanction consular officers’ making visa decisions in a purely arbitrary way that affects the basic rights of American citizens."

"We have the responsibility to ensure that such decisions, when born of laziness, prejudice or bureaucratic inertia, do not stand."

(end of Kenneth Ripple response)

#AmyConeyBarrett's decision in no way reflects the spirit of the #PopeFrancis's led Catholic Church, but reflects the #TrumpAdministration's xenophobic attitude towards immigration, and really the way he's presided over country as a whole.

I ask of my Arab & Muslim Republican friends, how much MORE proof do you want of who #Trump is, and what he envisions America to be? How many more GOPers need to dissent from this election for you to do so? The term #BidenRepublican is a thing now b/c of Trump's GOP leadership.

Sources:

1) currentaffairs.org/2020/09/why-am… (more rulings of #AmyConeyBarrett in this link)

2) Zahoor, Yafai, Yaqub, and Khaled's case - law.justia.com/cases/federal/…

*END Thread*

weren't***