2 readers online now  |  69 million page views

Antidisestablishmentarianism vs. Establishing Creeping Islamism in the United States

Reader comment on item: Smoking Out Islamists via Extreme Vetting

Submitted by Robert (United States), Feb 1, 2017 at 12:07

Primary school students and immigrants learning English in the United States have often been introduced in their vocabulary learning to the longest (non-scientific) word in the English language which is "Antidisestablishmentarianism." This word relates to the Establishment of a State Religion. Unlike England, which during the founding of the United States had the Anglican Church as the Religion of the Kingdom, the Founding Fathers explicitly refused to "establish" an official religion of the United States of America.

As a result, this principle became embodied not only in the First Amendment, but also first in that amendment like so:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or 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 Government for a redress of grievances."

The questions I pose here is whether the President have the authority to defend this amendment by preventing the immigration of huge demographics of potential Islamists who would "establish" Islam and Sharia Law upon the United States of America?

If the President of the United States has grounds to believe that people from seven (7) countries, namely Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen, will tend to establish Islam as the religion and law of the land, he has that authority. See here about said 7:

"What it's like in the 7 countries on Trump's travel ban list"
By Angela Dewan and Emily Smith, CNN
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/29/politics/trump-travel-ban-countries/

For the Constitutional legal arguments on the matter in detail see here:

"The best legal arguments against Trump's immigration ban"
January 31, 2017, by Steven Mulroy, Law Professor in Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Election Law, University of Memphis

http://theconversation.com/the-best-legal-arguments-against-trumps-immigration-ban-72196

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Antidisestablishmentarianism vs. Establishing Creeping Islamism in the United States by Robert

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2020 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)