April 21, 2017
Iranian-Americans marched into court in Washington, DC, Tuesday to make their case against President Trump’s travel ban.
Beyond arguing against the ban in the long term, they asked the judge to order that the Trump Administration immediately resume the normal visa-issuing process. Only small numbers of visas have reportedly been issued to Iranians in the last two months—athletes, people with medical emergencies and some other special cases have gotten visas, but the process is not back to the normal level one would expect after two courts earlier voided Trump’s travel ban.
Washington lawyer Cyrus Mehri, a civil rights attorney, is leading the courtroom effort. “It was a dagger in my heart as someone of Iranian-American heritage,” he said Tuesday. “I really saw it as a flash point for this Diaspora, over half a million strong, that has done so much to contribute to this country and is now in such danger of being potential scapegoats.”
There are two Iran-related suits being heard by the court this week.
One was filed in February by four advocacy groups—the National Iranian American Council, the Pars Equality Center, the Iranian-American Bar Association and the Public Affairs Alliance of Iranian Americans.
Its plaintiffs also include women planning their weddings in the US and trying to bring their parents from Iran, medical researchers concerned that if they return home to Iran they won’t be able to come back, and members of the LGBT community seeking refugee status because of anti-gay discrimination in Iran.
The second suit was filed late last month by the Universal Muslim Association of America, a Shiite religious group, in coordination with Muslim Advocates, the Southern Poverty Law Center and others. It argues Trump’s order has a particularly severe impact on Shiite Muslims because so many prominent clerics and scholars from that branch of Islam are based in Iran.
The lawsuit is being heard by US District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan. Previously, two other US district judges—one in Hawaii and one in Washington State—suspended Trump’s travel ban. An order by a third US district judge to freeze the ban, if granted, would take direct effect only if the previous two decisions were overturned.
The Trump ban affects nationals of six countries. But Iranians are disproportionately impacted because more Iranians than nationals of the five other countries combined historically seek and receive US visas. And Iranian students accounted for about 80 percent of the foreign students last year from the six countries, according to State Department data.
Lawyers for the groups said the success of the Iranian-American community is a national security asset, not a threat.
Statements filed in court came from individuals who said they face barriers to travel for work, family or study. Mehri said, “We hope our lawsuit shows that the capricious nature of the travel ban and its destructive impact on the Iranian-American community undercuts democracy at home and abroad and makes America less safe.”
The judges in the previous cases said the Trump order could be construed as unconstitutionally discriminating on religious grounds. By comparison, the Iranian-American case brought by Mehri draws on civil rights precedents directed at bias based on ethnicity and national origin.
Justice Department lawyers argued, “For the past 30 years, every President has invoked his power to protect the Nation by suspending entry of categories of aliens. As a legal matter, this Order is no different.”
That painted Iranians as a potential threat. State Department spokesman Mark Toner last month put it boldly: “This is a country that has shown itself … capable of exporting terrorists and terrorism abroad.”
But Iranian-Americans have been linked to only three terrorism cases inside the United States. The biggest category of terrorists has been American-born. The main foreign nationality group tied to terrorist acts in the US is Pakistani—but Pakistan is not on the travel ban list.
Activists note that rather than targeting Iranian government officials or military leaders, many of whom are already under sanctions, the travel ban hits ordinary Iranians, including those who hope to escape the regime and many grandmothers who seek visas to visit their grandkids in the United States.
“In our eyes, this is essentially some form of collective punishment for the transgressions of the Iranian government,” said Elham Khatami, outreach director for the National Iranian American Council. “If anything, it helps the Iranian government because it furthers the narrative that the US isn’t willing to treat Iranians like anyone else is treated.”
James Jeffrey, a former US ambassador to Iraq and Turkey, said some restrictions on Iran’s government made sense, but he disagreed with slapping a ban on Iranians wishing to come to the United States. “Many of the people who are going to be impacted by this are no fans of the Iranian regime,” Jeffrey said. “It really doesn’t make any sense.”