Quote:For documented immigrants, sort of. For undocumented immigrants (refugees from Somalia, Syria, Libya, Iraq, etc), no. Government security officials have confirmed this.

 

Also, Mr. Khan holding up the constitution as a defense against Trump's immigration policy was totally false.

 

One of the main criticisms of Donald Trump’s proposed moratorium on Muslim immigration is that it’s unconstitutional. For example, Republican presidential candidate and law graduate Marco Rubio said that the plan “violates the Constitution” earlier this week.

 

However, two notable law professors — Jan C. Ting of Temple University and Eric Posner of the University of Chicago — say those critics are wrong and possibly don’t know much about legal history.

 

Ting, a professor at Temple University’s School of Law and a former Immigration and Naturalization Services commissioner for the Department of Justice, explained to The Daily Caller that Trump’s plan is in keeping with over a hundred years of legal precedent.

 

“No kind of immigration restriction is unconstitutional,” Ting told TheDC. “The U.S. government can exclude a foreign national on any basis.”

 

http://dailycaller.com/2015/12/12/law-pr...itutional/

 

For the bolded part, I offer this Time Article stating the opposite:

 

http://time.com/4116619/syrian-refugees-...g-process/

 

From the article:


"Officials say it's the most intensive vetting process of any group that arrives in the U.S."

As for the rest of your statement, you seem to have found the only 2 attorneys who think an anti-Muslim policy will pass a Supreme Court test, even with Antonin Scalia returning as a zombie to cast the deciding vote.

 

As to the thread, I honestly don't know what I'd have done if someone handed me his well earned Purple Heart or any other medal.  I can't say I'd have done any different than Donald did, so I've stayed out of it.

 

Bunnie asked a question, I think I gave a fair answer.

---