Cotton: Immigration system 'does not serve the interests of American citizens'

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark. told Fox News Tuesday that his proposed legislation to halve the number of green cards issued to legal immigrats was "in keeping with historic norms" and "very generous."
COTTON, PERDUE UNVEIL BILL TO CUT LEGAL IMMIGRATION 'IN HALF' 
"What I simply think we need to do is get a legal immigration system that works for American workers," Cotton told Martha MacCallum on "The First 100 Days." "Over the last several decades, we’ve seen wages stagnate for blue collar workers. At the same time, we’ve had record high numbers of unskilled and low-skilled immigration. I think those two things are directly connected."
Cotton, who has been among President Donald Trump's most loyal supporters on Capitol Hill, said that Trump's victory in last year's presidential election was a signal from the American people to lawmakers to fix the country's immigration system.
"But the single issue on which he campaigned above all others and set himself apart was immigration and refocusing our immigration system on working Americans," he said.
The proposed legislation would also end the Diversity Visa Lottery, which Cotton called "outdated," as well as cut down on the number of refugees admitted to the U.S.
"Only about one in 15 immigrants coming in today is coming in because they have demonstrated skills or because they fill a demonstrated economic need," Cotton said. "That means that they directly compete with high school graduates and people that don’t have a high school degree. Of course, that means there are going to be fewer jobs for those American citizens and lower wages."

Justice Department argues for restoration of Trump travel ban

The Justice Department argued Tuesday that a federal appeals court should overturn a district court judge's order halting President Trump's executive action suspending travel to the U.S. from seven majority-Muslim nations.
The hearing before the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals judges was the greatest legal challenge yet to the travel ban, which has upended travel to the U.S. for more than a week and tested the new administration's use of executive power.
Several states have fought the ban on travelers from seven predominantly Muslim nations — Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Yemen — and insisted that it is unconstitutional.
Justice Department attorney August Flentje asked the court to restore Trump's order, contending that the president alone has the power to decide who can enter or stay in the United States, as well as suspend classes of aliens when their entry to the country is otherwise detrimental to national security.
"That's what the president did here," Flentje argued.
The government described the executive order as a "90-day pause" needed to ensure adequate standards were in place for visa screening, which Flentje called "plainly constitutional."
Judge Michelle T. Friedland, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, asked whether the government has any evidence connecting the seven nations to terrorism.
Flentje cited a number of Somalis in the U.S. who, he said, had been connected to the al-Shabab terrorist group terror group after judges asked for evidence. Flentje added that the case was moving fast and the government had not yet included additional evidence to support the ban.

Flentje also noted that the executive order was based in part on a determination made by the Obama administration and Congress over the past two years that labeled the countries in question as either having a significant presence by a foreign terrorist organization or being a state sponsor of terrorism.

The final minutes of the hearing were largely devoted to whether the travel ban was intended to discriminate against Muslims.

Judge Richard Clifton, a George W. Bush nominee, asked an attorney representing Washington state and Minnesota, which are challenging the ban, what evidence he had that it was motivated by religion.
"I have trouble understanding why we're supposed to infer religious animus when in fact the vast majority of Muslims would not be affected."
He said only 15 percent of the world's Muslims were affected, according to his calculations, and said the "concern for terrorism from those connected to radical Islamic sects is hard to deny."
Noah Purcell, Washington state's solicitor general, cited public statements by Trump calling for a ban on the entry of Muslims to the U.S. He said the states did not have to show every Muslim is harmed, only that the ban was motivated by religious discrimination.
Under questioning from Clifton, Flentje did not dispute that Trump made the statements.

Washington state, Minnesota and other states challenging the ban want the appellate court to allow a temporary restraining order blocking the travel ban — which also temporarily suspended the country's refugee program — to stand as their lawsuit moves through the legal system.
Purcell said that restraining order has not harmed the U.S. government.

Instead, he told the panel, the order had harmed Washington state residents by splitting up families, holding up students trying to travel for their studies and preventing people from visiting family abroad.

Clifton said he suspected that only a "small fraction" of the state's residents were affected.

The court adjourned with Friendland promising a ruling would come "as soon as possible." Whatever the court eventually decides, either side could ask the Supreme Court to intervene.
It is also possible that the panel could make a ruling on a technical point, such as whether the lower court's order is properly classified as a temporary restraining order, rather than on the larger merits of the case.

Warren finds voice, support after formally silenced at Sessions nomination debate

Sen. Elizabeth Warren took to Facebook late Tuesday night to finish delivering her speech after being formally silenced on the Senate floor for quoting Coretta Scott King during her criticism of President Trump’s nominee for attorney general.
The dramatic scene unfolded when the Massachusetts Democrat ran afoul of the chamber’s arcane rules-- Rule XIX-- by reading a three-decade-old letter from Dr. Martin Luther King’s widow that dated to Sen. Jeff Sessions’ failed judicial nomination three decades ago.
King wrote that when acting as a federal prosecutor, Sessions used his power to ‘‘chill the free exercise of the vote by black citizens.’’
Quoting King technically put Warren in violation of Senate rules for ‘‘impugning the motives’’ of Sessions, though the letter was written about 10 years before Sessions was elected to the Senate.
Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., called her formal silencing “totally unnecessary.” Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said both sides “should be ashamed" about the atmosphere on the floor.
“This place is going to devolve into nothing but a jungle,” Hatch said.
Though silenced, Warren later posted on Twitter that, “I will not be silent about a nominee for AG who has made derogatory & racist comments that have no place in our justice system.”
Top Senate Republican Mitch McConnell invoked the rules. After a few parliamentary moves, the GOP-controlled Senate voted 49-to-43 to silence Warren.
Warren is now forbidden from speaking again on Sessions’ nomination. A vote on Sessions is expected Wednesday evening. He is expected to be confirmed.
"She was warned. She was given an explanation. Nevertheless, she persisted," McConnell said. Her supporters later used #shepersisted as a rally cry.
Bernice King, the daughter of Coretta Scott King and Martin Luther King wrote on Twitter, “Thank you @SenWarren for being the soul of the Senate during the #Sessions hearing.”
The Democratic National Committee said it is a “sad day in America when the words of Martin Luther King Jr’s widow are not allowed on the floor of the United States Senate.”
Warren went on to read the letter from King on Facebook, which attracted two million views, according to The New York Times, an audience likely far greater than she would have gained on C-SPAN. Supporters took to social media with the hashtag #LetLizSpeak and #ShePersisted as something as a rally cry.
Warren, 67, hasn't ruled out a future White House run but has said she is focused on the 2018 senate race.
According to an Associated Press review of Warren's latest campaign finance reports, the Massachusetts Democrat took in a hefty $5.9 million in campaign contributions from January 2015 through the end of 2016.

Muslim Cartoons

Student Bullied on School Bus for Wearing 'Make America Great Again' Hat

A 12-year-old student from the St. Louis area was bullied for wearing a "Make America Great Again" hat on the school bus.
Cellphone video obtained by KMOV shows a group of students ganging up on the boy and yelling about President Donald Trump's proposed U.S.-Mexico border wall. It appears some punches were thrown.
"I saw him being berated and bullied and beat, literally beat, because he feels strongly about the world today," the sixth-grader's mother Christina Cortina told KMOV.
Cortina said she is outraged that her son was suspended in the aftermath of the incident, though he was the victim.
A representative for the Parkway School District said all students involved in the attack have faced "consequences" following a full investigation.

---

Santa Clara University Bans Conservative Group, Saying It Makes Liberal Students Feel ‘Unsafe’

At Santa Clara University, offended leftists are doing all they can to keep conservatives off campus.
Turning Point USA advertises itself as a group promoting “fiscal responsibility, free markets, and limited government.” Some Santa Clara students went before the school’s student senate to apply to start their own chapter on campus. A small group of students made their pitch, and then students and faculty at the school delivered speeches opposing the group.
In the end, the senate rejected the proposal, saying the group would make students feel “unsafe.”
“It was a lot of repetitive stuff,” Caleb Aleva, one of the Turning Points USA activists, told The Daily Caller. “A lot of them are lying about being afraid or they are genuinely in fear because of this false sense of danger promulgated by the media that anyone who is vaguely conservative is a Nazi or a white supremacist,” he said.
David Warne, one of the student senators at Santa Clara, told The Daily Caller that the group was compared to the alt-right in a presentation. “The order of the presentation goes like this: White Nationalists—>Alt-Right—>Identity Evropa—>Richard Spencer—>Milo Yiannopoulos—>Turning Point USA,” Warne wrote. Identity Evropa recently appeared on campus, but Warne said no one believes the posters were put up by students.
A few of Turning Point’s 350 chapters around the country have helped co-host Milo events, but the group as a whole doesn’t associate with him. The group’s events at college campuses haven’t led to major demonstrations or to outbreaks of violence.
Turning Point USA spokesman Matt Lamb contacted Santa Clara’s assistant director of student organizations to find out why the group was rejected. He told The Daily Caller that the assistant director “told the club to re-apply next quarter.” He then added that “she also said that one reason the student senate likely rejected us was because of the ‘mood’ after the last election.”
The group was voted down by a margin of 16-10, and the next step for them is to appeal the decision to the judicial branch of the student senate or wait until the next quarter.

Conway: Travel ban part of Trump's 'responsibility,' 'authority' and 'duty'

Counselor to the President Kellyanne Conway defended President Donald Trump's executive order halting travel to the U.S. from seven majority-Muslim nations Monday, saying that Trump "has a responsibility, the authority, and indeed, the duty to protect Americans."
Conway spoke to Fox News' "Hannity" hours after the Justice Department filed a brief with a federal appeals court seeking the ban's restoration three days after a federal judge in Washington state halted the order.
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT ASKS APPEALS COURT TO RESTORE TRUMP'S TRAVEL BAN 
Echoing the Justice Department brief, Conway argued that Friday's decision by U.S. District Court Judge James Robart was "overly broad."
"It’s a nationwide injunction," Conway said. "He referenced religion where, in fact, that has nothing to do with the executive order."
"The fact is," she added. "we don’t even know if these states that sued have standing. Individuals have standing and individuals usually need to show harm and damages."
Conway also argued that Robart was "wrong from the bench" when he stated that no one from the seven countries named in Trump's executive order — Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Sudan and Yemen — had been arrested on terror charges in the United States since 2001. An Associated Press report described Robart's statement as "a step too far."
"This is the judge who … issued a nationwide injunction," Conway said, "and was just wrong from the bench in what he said about what this type of extreme vetting would provide or would have prevented had it been in place earlier."

US court to hear arguments on Trump's travel ban

A U.S. federal  appeals court Tuesday will hear arguments over President Trump’s controversial temporary travel ban, and whether Trump’s order should be restored after last week’s federal judge’s ruling.
The filing with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals came three days after a federal judge in Washington state halted Trump's order and granted a nationwide stay.
The Justice Department said U.S. District Judge James Robart's order was "vastly overbroad" and said Trump's executive order was "a lawful exercise of the President's authority over the entry of aliens into the United States and the admission of refugees."
The appeals court refused to immediately reinstate the ban, and lawyers for Washington and Minnesota -- two states challenging it -- argued anew on Monday that any resumption would "unleash chaos again," separating families and stranding university students.
VIDEO: JUDGE NAPOLITANO'S TAKE ON THE TRAVEL BAN LEGAL BATTLE 
Oral arguments were set for Tuesday afternoon. Whatever the appeals court decides, either side could ask the Supreme Court to intervene.
It could prove difficult, though, to find the necessary five votes at the high court to undo a lower court order; the Supreme Court has been at less than full strength since Justice Antonin Scalia's death a year ago. The last immigration case that reached the justices ended in a 4-4 tie.
The president's executive order has faced legal uncertainty ever since Friday's ruling by Robart, which challenged both Trump's authority and his ability to fulfill a campaign promise.
The State Department quickly said people from the seven countries — Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen — could travel to the U.S. if they had valid visas. The Homeland Security Department said it was no longer directing airlines to prevent affected visa holders from boarding U.S.-bound planes.
On Monday in Colorado, a graduate student who had traveled to Libya with her 1-year-old son to visit her sick mother and attend her father's funeral was back in Fort Collins after having been stopped in Jordan on her return trip. She was welcomed with flowers and balloons by her husband and other children.
Two Yemeni brothers whose family has sued over the travel ban, and who'd been turned away in the chaotic opening days of the order, arrived at Dulles International Airport in Virginia, where they were greeted by their father.
"America is for everybody," Aqel Aziz said after greeting his sons.
Syrian immigrant Mathyo Asali said he thought his life was "ruined" when he landed at Philadelphia International Airport on Jan. 28 only to be denied entry to the United States. Asali, who returned to Damascus, said he figured he'd be inducted into the Syrian military. He was back on U.S. soil Monday.
"It's really nice to know that there's a lot of people supporting us," Asali told Gov. Tom Wolf, who greeted the family at a relative's house in Allentown.
The legal fight involves two divergent views of the role of the executive branch and the court system.
The government has asserted that the president alone has the power to decide who can enter or stay in the United States, while Robart has said a judge's job is to ensure that an action taken by the government "comports with our country's laws."
His Friday ruling triggered a Twitter rant by Trump, who dismissed Robart as a "so-called judge." On Sunday, Trump tweeted, "Just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril. If something happens blame him and court system. People pouring in. Bad!"