Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Preston Beatty
Uma Gupta
Joe Byler
Focus Questions/Notes:
what is being tried in court. Originally EO- 1 and EO- 2 (detailed in the
link below under case history) were being tried in lower courts. Section b
(a) and Section b (b) were granted stay, meaning that the court allowed
2) Whether the proclamation violates the establishment clause of the Constitution (First
Amendment.
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the
press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
Theme:
Protecting American lives
*Protecting American lives and Democracy*
Legal Theory:
President Trump is within his realm of legal and constitutional rights in passing Executive order
13780 because it does not violate the establishment clause, and he is granted authority to pass
such a law under acts of congress and in keeping with past precedent.
*The lower court's decision to ignore the legal precedent of the higher courts and to interpret
what President Trump’s intentions were in signing the executive order both sets a dangerous
precedent as to what the lower courts have the power to declare when in opposition to the higher
courts and also would allow for the courts to legally interpret what a politician’s intentions were
in passing a bill, which would upset the balance of powers and radically change our democracy.*
Outline
The United States of America, the land of the free and the home of the brave. But how can
Americans be free if the lives of innocent Americans are not protected, if malicious acts of terror
threaten the lives of Americans everyday? However, we are fortunate enough to have a President
Jury, I want you to meet President Donald J. Trump. The leader of the United States of America,
elected by the people. On September 24, 2017 President Donald Trump signed executive order
13780 (also known as the travel ban), which suspended entry for 90 days of foreigners from 7
countries identified as having high terrorist risks by Congress and the Executive (Oyez).
III. 3-4 Paragraphs on story of case (NO ARGUMENTS--must maintain credibility)
But Hawaii refuses follow the President’s orders to protect the lives of the innocent. Hawaii
took the travel ban to court and the district judge put the order on hold. The federal government
appealed the ruling to the ninth circuit court of appeals. The order is allowed to be in effect while
the government appeals, put it gives the order a huge exception. The federal government went to
the Supreme Court to get the full order into effect to fully protect innocent American lives
(Oyez).
To further prove the Jury, the court brings in John Kelly- White House Chief of Staff and
Introduce witnesses…
The executive order is both constitutional and has no religion basis. It is very much legal for the
president to pass executive orders and past precedents set during Jimmy Carter’s administration
that give the president the authority to implement executive orders to protect American lives.
The Kleindienst v. Mandel ruling and Kerry v. Din ruling both set the precedent that Trump’s
This order in no way violates the establishment clause in the first Amendment the prohibits the
This is not a muslim ban. All the countries being banned are not Muslim! In fact some of the
countries are only 13% muslim. North Korea and Venezuela are included in the ban and neither
have large muslim populations. It’s not even a ban. The executive order is simply suspending
citizens from the countries that give a high risk for american terror threats. The citizens are only
suspended for 90 or 120 days, so the US can further investigate them to make sure that they will
In addition to all of this the lower court’s decision also sets a dangerous precedent. The lower
courts were interpreting Donald Trump’s intent in passing the ban. The courts cannot be allowed
to determine whether someone intended to violate the constitution. If so, any President’s decision
to do almost anything could be ruled as unconstitutional by a judge of the opposing party who
believes the President intended to violate the constitution. Every executive order could be struck
down by any judge who simply dislikes the law. The precedent that would be set by ruling in the
defendants favor disrupts the balance of power between the branches of government and would
essentially give the judiciary the unchecked power to stop any action the executive branch makes
based off of a feeling that the executive branch had an intent to violate the constitution.
V. Last paragraph must circle back to theme and end with call to action
This is nothing more than protecting innocent American lives. Jury, my council will ask you to
return to a verdict of President Trump’s authority to continue the full effect of the executive
Opening: Hawaii
Plaintiff Witnesses:
Jury, I present Doris Meissner as an expert witness. I will be questioning her to help clarify the
I have been involved with the national government for 45 years, first with the Department of
Justice, including being the Executive Director on the Cabinet Committee on Illegal Aliens.
Under Presidents Reagan and Clinton, I was the Commissioner of US Immigration and
Naturalization Services, and am now a senior fellow at the Migration Policy Institute, where my
main focus is on administering the nation’s immigration laws, systems, and agencies, as well as
immigration enforcement, border patrol, and cooperation with other countries (MPI).
So first, what this order does, is clearly express that it was made to protect Americans from terror
attacks, ones done by foreigners in particular. In order to do this, the first main point is made that
a 90-day suspension of entry from the countries of Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Syria, Somalia, Libya,
Sudan, North Korea, and Venezuela, chosen because of their growing presence as potentially
dangerous countries. Next is the 120 day suspension of the refugee protection organization
USRAP, because terrorist organizations have been known for infiltrating other countries through
refugee programs. Additionally, the entry of certain foreign nationals is also being suspended so
a thorough background process can be conducted. However, to ease the work of intelligence
agencies, foreign nationals must submit a report on their history and other relevant information
required, and will be allowed into the country once they submit those briefs. These nationals are
also denied entry if they do not follow certain specific regulations, such as having a valid visa on
the date of this order or were outside the country during on the date of the order. However, they
will be allowed entry if they are a citizen or hold dual citizenship, if they have been granted
asylum, or if they are a diplomat. Finally, one of the biggest parts of this order is implementing a
stronger uniform screening and vetting platform for all immigration services. This includes a
number of things, such as a entry-exit tracking service for suspects in terrorist cases, and other
Well, qualification is determined case-by-case. Cases with infants or very young children, or
those in urgent need of medical attention will be allowed in. If they are employed in the U.S. or
by the U.S. government, if they have significant contacts who vouch for their safety, or if they
wish to live with their spouse who is currently living within the U.S. Finally, if they a
government sponsored exchange visitor, they will be able to apply for an individualized waiver
Using your expertise and research, can you tell us what the Executive order aims to do?
This executive order was made for the sole purpose of protecting innocent American lives. In the
broadest sense, this order is giving the president the authority to suspend the entry of
What effects does your research show this Executive Order will have?
With my colleague Sarah Pierce, we took apart Trump’s several executive orders involving the
Executive Order for an Issue Brief and analyzed them provision by provision, policy by policy.
We have checked that everything follows the codes and regulations that we have become
familiar with through education, experience, and research, and have published our examinations
for the Migration Policy Institute. We found that there are numerous examples of positive change
that will come from the creation of this bill. The implementation of a database updated with the
convictions and crimes committed by foreign individuals in our country using similar technology
to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program. This is a very effective system and is expected
to help aid in calculating the long-term costs for U.S. refugee resettlement. Additionally, the
uniform screening standards that are implemented are expected to identify all potential criminals
before allowing them to enter, and will record their data to be referred to higher level intelligence
No, this is not the first time in which a president has done this. President Jimmy Carter made
executive order 12172, which held and denied non-immigrant visas from Iran (Jimmy). On the
opposite side, presidents Reagan, Bush, and Obama have all created some form of executive
order to exempt millions of undocumented immigrants already living within the country. Carter
and Obama received quite a bit of backlash, the same as President Trump has, but all are
Some parts of this ban, such as the exemption of lawful citizens from re-entering the country,
had to be modified because of section 212(f) of Article II. It’s quite give and take with some of
the policy, which is why several versions of this Executive Order were released before the final
was decided.
Cross: Hawaii
Jury I present John Malcolm as an expert witness. I will be questioning the witness to establish
whether or not Executive Order 13780 is a lawful establishment of President Trump’s power.
I am the Vice President of the Institution for Constitutional Government, and I am the Director
I am a graduate of Harvard Law School and I hold a bachelor’s degree in economics from
Columbia College. I served as deputy assistant attorney general in the Department of Justice’s
Yes, I am.
So U.S. Code 1182 for inadmissible aliens serves the purpose to grant the President of the United
States the authority to, and I quote, “suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens’ ‘for
such period as he shall deem necessary, when he’ ‘finds that the entry of any aliens or of any
For those of us who haven't attended Harvard, would you mind explaining?
To put it simply, the President of the United States has the authority, under the U.S. code, to
prohibit the entry of immigrants if he deems it necessary for the protection of the United States.
How does this law relate to the actions President Trump has taken?
In this specific case for President Trump, he has exercised this authority granted to him, by
Congress, in order to ban for 90 days the entry of foreign nationals from six countries that were
“designated as presenting heightened terrorism-related risks.” Several Presidents in the past, such
Can you explain your past work in the military and/or government?
I was enlisted in the Marine Corps in 1970 and have served in the military for nearly five
decades in positions including chief of Southern Command, senior assistant to the secretary of
defense and legislative liaison to Congress, and I have also served tours in both Iraq and
Afghanistan (Kopan). Just recently, I was secretary for the Department of Homeland Security.
It's everywhere. It's constant. It's nonstop. There are incredible terrorist plots against the United
States. The good news for us in America, is that we have amazing people protecting us every
day. But it can happen here almost anytime, we have to understand that every single day there
are people plotting to try and hurt us. And to beat these people, we as a government, as a
military, must be perfect. But if to put it in perspective, if you knew, what I know about
terrorism, you wouldn’t leave the house (Kelly [05:26]).
How were you involved in the process of writing Executive Order 13780?
I, along with Attorney General Jefferson Sessions submitted a letter to President Trump detailing
how weaknesses in our immigration system compromise our nation’s security and
recommending a temporary pause on entry of nationals from the designated countries.
With the exception of Iraq, generally speaking we don’t have embassies in those countries, 3 of
the 6 are now are designated as terrorist supporters by the State Department, and most of them
are countries in collapse (Kelly [02:54]). Because we cannot deem the information provided by
these countries reliable to vet, this pause ensures that the likes of terrorists do not set foot on
American soil.
Cross: Hawaii
Jury I present James Mattis. I will be questioning the witness to establish the reasoning behind
I am the secretary of Defense for this current administration and am therefore a member of
I commanded the many levels of the Marines for over four decades, including combat tours in
Iraq and Afghanistan. I served as the head of central command under president Obama. I was as
a visiting fellow at the Hoover institute at Stanford and specialized in leadership, national
(https://www.defense.gov/Leaders/Secretary-of-Defense/)
I started in the United States Marines when I was 18 years old, I was promoted to the rank of
second lieutenant in 1972. I served as a platoon commander. During the gulf war I was promoted
to lieutenant colonel I commanded the first battalion, during Afghanistan I commanded the 7th
marine regiment, during Iraq I commanded the 1st marine division, I also commanded the marine
Can you repeat for us which countries are addressed in Executive Order 13780?
No, they are not. “North Korea, and Venezuala” are mentioned in the ban and are of “Buddhist,
Trump determined which countries to include based on the fact that the terror rate in countries in
the OCED was the highest in the world in 2016. Based on the global terror index, Syria has the
4th highest rate of terror in the world, Yemen has the 6th, Lybia has the 10th, Sudan has the
18th. All the countries listed in this Executive order are very high on this index, and were
selected by Trump because they pose a very real threat to American lives
(Globalterrorismindex.org).
The countries on the list are also home to several terrorist organizations, that have made
threats, or carried out acts of terror in the past. These groups include Boko Haram, Al Queda,
and most recently ISIS. ISIS has a very strong presence in the countries the Mr. Trump included,
with hundreds of reported troops in Yemen, Lybia, Syria, and most others on the list.
(Globalterrorismindex.org). ISIS has already claimed to send refugees into the united states and
europe to carry out vicious acts of terror against our own citizens. Trump has an obligation as
president to keep the American people safe, and this act does just that. It is Donald Trump taking
precautionary measures in order to save the lives of our people. It is imperative that we defend
ourselves from terror attacks before they happen, and it is vital that we protect American lives.
Did Trump select the countries listed in Executive order 13780 because they were mostly
Muslim?
He did not. As I have said Executive order 13780 is not limited to muslim countries. The
countries selected have an extremely high score on the global terror Index
(Globalterrorismindex.org). Mr. Trump selected the countries based upon the sheer amount of
terrorist activity based in the countries. He imposed this ban because these countries have the
It wasn’t based on religion, as Mr.Trump selected other countries such as North Korea. It was
simply a ban meant to protect the citizens of the United States of America from harm. There was
no religious ban in fact the only thing that implies a ban based on religion is the speculation of
others.
Cross: Hawaii
What is your current occupation and what is your connection to the case?
amendment rights, and I’m focusing on whether or not the travel ban qualifies as a violation of
the establishment clause. I have spoken on public radio and other media outlets regarding
Trump’s executive order and its effect on the nations included in the ban.
Formally, the establishment clause prohibits the establishment of a national religion by Congress.
Essentially, it forbids religious discrimination and most importantly prevents withholding the
Although denying entry into the country on the basis of religion would likely violate the
establishment clause, as I understand it, Trump’s intent was not to discriminate against any
religious group nor was one religion the blatant target of the ban. The set of criteria established
in the 1968 Lemon vs. Kurtzman case for determining whether a law violates the establishment
clause states that the law’s primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits on
religion. Trump’s travel ban passes the so-called Lemon Test, given that it was not an attempt to
foster any government entanglement with religion nor was it racially discriminatory. So I would
have to say Trump’s actions were constitutional as no First amendment rights were infringed
upon.
Describe how the travel ban did not discriminate against Muslims.
Clearly not every Muslim in the world is an extremist who will commit terrorist attacks, and
along these lines, President Donald Trump’s travel ban does not directly target Muslims. If the
ban was created only to prevent the entry of Muslims into our nation, then the ban would have
been placed on countries that have more Muslim people. Indonesia, which is not a banned nation,
holds the highest Muslim population in the world. In fact, none (zero) of the seven most highly
populated Muslim countries in the world are included in the ban. Thus one cannot call the ban
What then was the reasoning behind the ban, if not simply to revoke the rights of Muslim people
The reason why the ban cannot possibly be violating the rights of Muslims (as designated by the
establishment clause) is that the purpose behind it was protection, not to discriminate against a
religion. Moreover, it is absolutely not the case that the target of President Trump’s ban was the
Islamic faith. Instead, the need was the tendency of specific regions that happen to contain an
Islamic populous, to engage in life-threatening violence. The seven countries in the ban are
plagued by national agitation, whether or not religious belief is behind the violent acts taking
Thank you for your thoughtful input. Have you any final arguments to close with or precedents to
establish?
Well, I would like to tie in a final point. It has been found in other cases that some government
action implicating religion is permissible, and indeed unavoidable, For example, Engel v. Vitale
outlawed school prayer (praying in class), which had obvious implications on certain
prayer-oriented religions (Islam, even,coincidentally), but was done for the benefit of all
It is not clear, in this case, just how much the Establishment Clause tolerates. So my point being,
that although Muslims may find themselves disproportionately affected by the travel ban, this is
not the intent of the ban, it is for the safety and security of the US as a whole. Trump’s ban may
not be the ideal scenario for all parties, but it is a broad settlement that is still within the
boundaries of the First amendment, while his executive order takes into account the precedence
of national security.
Cross: Hawaii
Jury, I present Donald J. Trump. I will be questioning the witness to establish his intent behind
I am here today to talk to you about the goals of my Executive Order and my intentions in
writing it.
I passed this Executive Order to protect American lives. That is the only motive and goal behind
this executive order. I want to make America great again, but it has to be safe first. It has to be
safe. As President of the United States, I have passed three executive orders over the past year to
prevent foreign terrorists from killing Americans (Finnegan). I plan on ensuring the protection of
American lives through a better screening process of those entering this country (Bierman).
America, you should not, you will not, have to live in fear. We want to keep out these threats,
these people who are threats to our citizens and our soldiers (CNN).
How did you decide which countries to mention in Executive Order 13780?
I have included countries solely based on the threat they pose to America. There is no other
factor that has gone into deciding which countries are listed in my Executive order. This is a
matter of national security. Nothing else. Our national security comes first. I have chosen the
countries with the highest threat of terrorism, according to my secretary of defense and various
indexes (Global Terrorism Index 2017). Amongst these I have included are Venezuela and North
Korea, and other highly dangerous countries (Cameron). I am also keeping in communication
with these countries. I am trying to work with their governments to reach improved means of
dealing with terror, devise better information sharing, and make it EASIER to safely travel
The ONLY thing that these countries have in common is that they currently pose a threat to our
national security. These countries are all are a danger to America. We need to protect our
country, and our soldiers. We have an absolutely terrific country, and we can’t have terror
Cross: Hawaii
Counters:
I have a great relationship with muslims. I visited Saudi Arabia recently, and was greeted with
huge support. Muslims love me and they love this ban, because they know that it is keeping
America safe. The thing is, FDR created concentration camps, Obama created his own travel
ban, but the crooked media refuses to focus on that (CNN). The media wants this to be a
I am the least racist person you have interviewed. People are constantly spreading rumors about
me, and honestly, they don’t bother me because I know they are not sure. I am and very smart
businessman, and I have done huge business deals with Muslims. Muslims love doing business
with me, and I have many Muslims friends who agree with this this ban (CNN).
I am a senior research fellow at the Institute for Policy and Strategy at the Interdisciplinary
Center Herzliya in Israel. I also have headed over 25 research projects, many for the United
Some of the more prominent groups concentrated in the Middle East and Africa include ISIS,
Can you tell us a little bit more about the goal of these groups?
Based on my research, many of these terror organizations look to strike fear into their enemies
and destroy what they call “Western Civilization.” They accomplish this through terrorist attacks
Yes
Certainly.
Outline:
I. Esteemed members of the Jury, I would like to remind you are deciding whether or not
we should protect American lives. Your choice will determine whether you whistle as
you walk to the grocery store, or you hear the whistling of bombs as you seek shelter in a
grocery store. You decide if a lawful and constitutional Executive order will protect your
children. So let's step back for a minute and look at the facts.
A. First, as Doris Meissner explained, the Executive order has many important
facets. Most importantly, it is NOT a travel “ban.” It is a temporary pause on the
entry of foreign citizens, subject to personalized waivers. She explained that his
act is an improvement of our vetting standards and a leap in our access to vital
information regarding terrorist organizations that pose a very real threat to our
country.
B. After this, John Malcolm explained to us that the proclamation is a lawful
exercise of the president’s authority to suspend entry of aliens abroad. He
explained how, like many presidents before him, including Obama and Jimmy
Carter, Donald Trump was exercising the authority granted to him in congress in t
under the inadmissible aliens clause of the US Code.
C. Then, chief of staff John Kelly explained to us that Himself and the Attorney
General wrote letters expressing their support for Trump’s Executive order. Why
did the previous head of homeland security support the executive order? Because,
as he said, it is an issue of national security. Our lives are at risk every single day
under the threat of foreign terrorism attacks. To put it simply, as Kelly did, if we
knew what he did about terrorism, we would never leave the house.
D. Next, James Mattis himself explained to us that the countries mentioned in this
executive order were selected because of the threat they posed to national
security. The nation's mentioned, including Venezuela and North Korea, include a
range of religious backgrounds, but share one thing in common. They are amongst
the highest ranked countries on the terror index. They are the countries that
potentially endanger American lives.
E. We then spoke to John Taylor who, in no uncertain terms, explained to us that the
Executive order is NOT a violation of the establishment clause because it DOES
not deal with religion at all. The ill founded and speculation based theory some
desperately cling to is that the Executive order discriminates against Muslims. Not
only did Taylor explain to us that the act includes nation's without Muslim
majorities, he also explains that the seven most densely Muslim countries are not
included on the ban. Not included. Sure, countries with the highest rankings on
the terror index are listed, but not the countries with the highest Muslim
population. Not to mention never one is religion mentioned in the executive order
itself. This tells us that the proclamation is about NOTHING more than national
security.
F. Next we heard testimony from President Donald Trump himself, who told us once
and for all that his intent with this order is to protect national security. Not to
discriminate. He selected the countries based on the threat they posed to America
and upon the advice of the secretary of defense, his chief of staff, and the attorney
general.
II. Brief overview of why the main points of the other side are incorrect
Rebuttal: Preston
1. We have shown that the case is both constitutional and helps to protect the security of
American citizens.
2. Now I just want to briefly remind the jury of the most important aspect of the case: The
Precedent. You see, the decision we make today will have a tremendous impact on the
future of this great nation. If you rule in favor of the defendants, You will set possibly the
most dangerous precedent in American history. You will give the courts the authority to
interpret the intent of elected officials. Any law or executive order passed could be struck
down by the courts simply because a court believes they intended to violate the
constitution. Judges of opposing parties could strike down laws fairly passed by congress.
The already least democratic branch of the government, consisting of appointed officials
often with life terms, would be granted the unchecked power to shape our government.
Your decision could destroy the country. So choose carefully.
Lawyers’ Works Cited
www.lawfareblog.com/argument-summary-hawaii-v-trump.
Dorf, Michael C. "Did Trump’s “Muslim Ban” Talk Permanently Taint His
trumps-muslim-ban-talk-permanently-taint-immigration-policy. Accessed 6
Apr. 2018.
---. "What’s DifferentAnd What Isn’tAbout Travel Ban 3.0." Verdict, 4 Oct.
2017, verdict.justia.com/2017/10/04/whats-different-isnt-travel-ban-3-0.
www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/first_amendment.
www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/travel-ban-presidents-authority.
“Ninth Circuit Hears Oral Argument President's Travel Ban, Dec 6 2017.” C-SPAN.org,
www.c-span.org/video/?437732-1/ninth-circuit-hears-oral-argument-presidents-travel-ba
Pierce, Sarah, and Doris Meissner. “Trump Executive Order on Refugees and Travel Ban: A
n-brief-review.
Attempted Entry Into the United States by Terrorists or Other Public-Safety Threats.” The
www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-proclamation-enhancing-vetting-ca
pabilities-processes-detecting-attempted-entry-united-states-terrorists-public-safety-threats
Shoichet, Catherine. "Trump's travel ban stranded her. Then America welcomed
www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsroom/immigration/b/immigration-law-blog/archive/2018/0
1/21/supreme-court-to-review-travel-ban-3-0-trump-v-hawaii.aspx.
ballotpedia.org/Trump_v._International_Refugee_Assistance_Project.
Xi, James Y. "Judge Gorsuch and the Establishment Clause." Stanford Law Review,
Bierman, Noah. “Donald Trump promises ‘extreme screening’ to combat ‘medieval times.’” LA
www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-donald-trump-promi
Cameron, Darla. “Why Trump’s latest travel ban included these eight countries.” Washington
www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/national/permanent-travel-ban/?utm_term=.8e3
Finnegan, Connor. “A timeline of Trump’s battle with the courts to keep his travel ban alive.”
abcnews.go.com/Politics/timeline-trumps-battle-courts-travel-ban-alive/story?id=505597
“Trump: We don’t want them here.” Youtube, uploaded by CNN, 27 Jan. 2017,
“Trump: Many Muslims friends are in agreement with me.” Youtube, uploaded by CNN, 9 Dec.
“Trump: 'I'm the Least Racist Person'.” Youtube, uploaded by CNN, 9 Dec. 2015,