By George Wilson, contributing columnist | It’s always good to look at patterns of reasoning and behavior of candidates for public office on issues. For example, Mike Pence, as governor of the state of Indiana, issued a ruling saying that he will not allow any Syrians to be placed in the state of Indiana—with federal money. So, the states receive substantial grants from the federal government to aid in the resettlement of refugees, including Syrians.
According to published reports this policy was challenged by a resettlement group in Indiana that works with, among other people, Syrians. And a judge, a local judge in a federal court judge in Indiana, enjoined the policy, saying that this was unfair and discriminatory.
And just recently, a three-judge panel of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, upheld the lower court’s injunction. It said that this is absolutely discriminatory to say that we will not admit into our state people from one national origin or from one country on the absolutely fabricated claim that they would be terrorists. This is not a liberal circuit, by any means. All three of those judges are most conservative—Judge Posner, Judge Easterbrook and Diane Sykes, upheld the lower court’s injunction. Judge Sykes, by the way, is on Donald Trump’s list of possible Supreme Court nominee
Judge Posner said the argument made by Mike Pence’s lawyers is the equivalent of saying “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 the race is therefore not his motive, he isn’t discriminating.” That’s essentially what Mike Pence said. “I don’t hate Syrians. I’m just afraid of them.” So, a three-judge panel has overturned that ruling, and Syrians can now be settled in Indiana. Perhaps Pence was just trying to pick up some cheap political points.
Follow Us