October 3, 2016 | No Comments
A federal appeals court has rejected Indiana Gov. Mike Pence’s attempt to stem the flow of Syrian refugees into his state, saying that his actions were based on ‘nightmare speculation’ about possible terrorist attacks.
A three-judge panel of the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled unanimously Monday that Pence’s decision to deny reimbursement for resettlement of Syrian refugees appeared to violate federal law by discriminating on the basis of nationality. Pence announced his action last November, well before he was named as the GOP vice presidential nominee.
“The governor of Indiana believes, though without evidence, that some of these persons were sent to Syria by ISIS to engage in terrorism and now wish to infiltrate the United States in order to commit terrorist acts here. No evidence of this belief has been presented, however; it is nightmare speculation,” wrote Judge Richard Posner, joined by Judges Frank Easterbrook and Diane Sykes.
Posner said that if such immigrants do pose a danger, Pence’s actions would simply redirect the threat to other states.
“As far as can be determined from public sources, no Syrian refugees have been arrested or prosecuted for terrorist acts or attempts in the United States. And if Syrian refugees do pose a terrorist threat, implementation of the governor’s policy would simply increase the risk of terrorism in whatever states Syrian refugees were shunted to,” Posner wrote. “Federal law does not allow a governor to deport to other states immigrants he deems dangerous; rather he should communicate his fears to the Office of Refugee Resettlement.”
A spokeswoman for Pence, Kara Brooks, indicated the governor’s disagreement with the ruling but did not say if he plans to pursue his appeal further.
“The safety and security of the people of Indiana is Governor Pence’s highest priority,” Brooks said in a statement. “The state of Indiana took decisive action last year to suspend resettlement of Syrian refugees after the terrorist attack in Paris and because the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security acknowledged security gaps with regard to screening refugees from Syria. In addition, as recently as September 21, the State Department spokesman is quoted as saying he ‘wouldn’t debate the fact that there’s the potential for ISIS terrorists to try to insert themselves’ into the refugee program.”
However, the appeals court opinion ridicules Pence’s claim that selectively blocking Syrian refugees is not discriminatory because it’s based on the threat those immigrants pose.
“That’s the equivalent of [Pence] saying (not that he does say) that he wants to forbid black people to settle in Indiana not because they’re black but because he’s afraid of them, and since race is therefore not his motive he isn’t discriminating. But that of course would be racial discrimination, just as his targeting Syrian refugees is discrimination on the basis of nationality,” Posner wrote.
Posner noted that Indiana is free to withdraw completely from the federal refugee resettlement program, but that doing so won’t guarantee no refugees come to the Hoosier State since the feds can contract directly with a nonprofit in states that don’t participate.
The ruling leaves in place a preliminary injunction that a nonprofit group, Exodus Refugees International, won from a lower court. It forbids the state from selectively cutting off funding for work done to resettle Syrian refugees
All three appeals court judges assigned to the case are Republican appointees. Posner and Easterbrook were nominated by President Ronald Reagan. Sykes is an appointee of President George W. Bush.
The ruling comes a day before Pence faces what may be his highest-profile moment of the campaign: a debate with Democratic vice presidential nominee Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia at Longwood University in Farmville, Virginia.