Four years ago, an election altered the reality of Muslims in America and all over the globe. As president, Donald Trump made real his promise to ban Muslims by abusing his authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Once that ban was legitimized by the Supreme Court, he used the same authority to issue ban after ban, discriminating against Black and Brown people in furtherance of his white supremacist agenda.
 
As we round the corner on this presidential term, it is critical that these discriminatory bans and all the related policies, including social media vetting, are rescinded and a more stringent standard is put in place to protect against these abuses of authority by future presidents. Every executive order and proclamation using authority INA 212(f) must be rescinded immediately and the original National Origin-Based Antidiscrimination for Nonimmigrants Act (NO BAN Act) must be signed into law to protect the American people from such discrimination and abuse moving forward.
 
Throughout his campaign, Trump promised to ban Muslims from the United States with naked vitriol that disregarded the Constitution and the American ideal of equality. In the days and weeks that followed, people from all walks of life preemptively promised to register with Muslims if Trump created a registry, and safety pins became a symbol to express silent solidarity for all who might be attacked. In an attempt to prevent harm to Muslims in its final days, the Obama administration dismantled the framework for the original post-9/11 registration program, National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS). Few realized the forthcoming reality, and instead many hoped that Trump’s campaign was an attempt to garner the votes with his base and would not manifest in discriminatory policies.
 
That hope was short-lived. Just one week into his presidency, Trump issued his Muslim ban, sending his own administration into disarray and our country into chaos. But this time it was different. Instead of the public silence that followed NSEERS, as people were disappeared from our country, many were outraged and ready to act. In hours, airports nationwide were flooded with protesters demanding that Muslims be let into the country. Members of Congress, including Rep. John Lewis, showed up and waited for every person at the airport to be released.
 
It was a defining moment in American history: an uprising that made our collective resistance to oppression and discrimination clear.
 
However, the will of the people is not always immediately reflected in the outcomes of our government or our systems. Though numerous courts rejected Trump’s ban and cited its naked discrimination and animus, the administration repeatedly re-enacted it — and even claimed that the third version of the ban was the result of a secret process that was disconnected from the President’s promise to ban Muslims from the United States. Ultimately, the Supreme Court decided that claim gave it just enough cover to uphold the third Muslim ban, in a 5-4 ruling that is one of the court’s historic failures.
 
It was not the first time the Supreme Court failed, and it likely won’t be the last. One of the most infamous Supreme Court failures was allowing the incarceration of Japanese people in America through so-called internment camps. It was 40 years after Fred Korematsu refused to submit to Japanese incarceration camps that his conviction was finally overturned in federal court, though the Supreme Court decision still stood. A few years later, a bill was passed and signed into law providing redress and reparations for those who were incarcerated. A few months after that, Fred Korematsu was awarded a Medal of Freedom. Indeed, he spent his life fighting for these freedoms and recognition alongside numerous advocacy organizations and people all over the country. It’s no surprise that his daughter, Karen Korematsu, founded the Korematsu Institute and has played a critical role in defending the rights of Muslims.
 
Much like Japanese incarceration, the Trump administration used fear-mongering under the veil of “national security” to further its discriminatory agenda — this time by suspending visas under INA 212(f) to repeatedly ban Black and Brown people. It began with the Muslim and refugee bans, and once legitimized by the Supreme Court, it extended to more countries, specifically targeting Africans, as well as the asylum ban and a ban on certain people unable to prove they would have health insurance products. Once the pandemic hit, Trump used the same authority to issue ban after ban — again, preying on people’s fears while failing to implement an effective response or meet people’s need for COVID-relief.
 
Eventually though, the systems catch up with the people they represent — though many get hurt along the way. Muslims, along with other Black and Brown people, have been hurting for far too long.
 
It is time to rescind the Muslim ban, all the bans that came after it, and the corresponding policies. It is time to put a more stringent standard in place to prevent future abuses of this authority, like that in the original NO BAN Act. It is time for civil rights and liberties again.

Manar Waheed, Senior Legislative and Advocacy Counsel, ACLU

Across the country, over 5 million people who are of voting age cannot vote because of felony disenfranchisement laws, including one in five Black Americans. These laws are a relic of the Jim Crow era, and were intentionally designed to suppress the vote — particularly the Black vote — by limiting the impact of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments.

This week, Demetrius Jifunza, Lewis Conway, and Jennifer Taylor join us on At the Polls to share how these laws have impacted them personally after incarceration, and how states are fighting back. Listen to the podcast to learn more.

At the Polls: Why do we take voting rights away in America?

At the Polls: Why do we take voting rights away in America?

Over 5 million Americans are kept from the polls by laws that prohibit people with felony convictions from voting. While the intricacies of these laws vary from state to state, people who have been convicted of a felony are blocked from voting in ...

Over 5 million Americans are kept from the polls by laws that prohibit people with felony convictions from voting. While the intricacies of these laws vary from state to state, people who have been convicted of a felony are blocked from voting in ...

Listen to this episode

Losing the right to vote isn’t the only way a felony conviction can derail life, long after a person completes their sentence. Having a criminal record can make it more difficult to get a job, secure housing, access health care, or even care for one’s children. These obstacles stand in the way of formerly incarcerated people trying to reenter society and rebuild their lives.

The good news is that several states are reforming felony disenfranchisement laws, often with bipartisan support. Listen to this week’s episode of At the Polls and subscribe to learn more about felony disenfranchisement and what’s being done to stop this voter suppression.

%3Ciframe%20class%3D%22media-youtube-player%22%20width%3D%22580%22%20height%3D%22324%22%20title%3D%22America%20Should%20Let%20People%20with%20Felonies%20Vote%20%7C%20At%20the%20Polls%22%20src%3D%22https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube-nocookie.com%2Fembed%2FSgDkU9EEL3A%3Fwmode%3Dopaque%26amp%3Bcontrols%3D1%26amp%3Bmodestbranding%3D1%26amp%3Brel%3D0%26amp%3Bshowinfo%3D0%26amp%3Bcolor%3Dwhite%26autoplay%3D1%26version%3D3%26playsinline%3D1%22%20name%3D%22America%20Should%20Let%20People%20with%20Felonies%20Vote%20%7C%20At%20the%20Polls%22%20frameborder%3D%220%22%20allowfullscreen%3D%22%22%20id%3D%22America%20Should%20Let%20People%20with%20Felonies%20Vote%20%7C%20At%20the%20Polls%22%20allow%3D%22autoplay%22%3EVideo%20of%20America%20Should%20Let%20People%20with%20Felonies%20Vote%20%7C%20At%20the%20Polls%3C%2Fiframe%3E

Privacy statement. This embed will serve content from youtube-nocookie.com.

This year, ensuring every mail-in ballot is counted is more important than ever. While the share of voters casting ballots by mail has grown steadily in recent years, the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic triggered a surge in mail-in voting during primaries that has continued in the lead-up to Election Day. Already, 90.7 million absentee ballots have been requested or sent to voters in 50 states and the District of Columbia. Critically, a growing number of people of color plan to vote by mail rather than in-person in this election. 

Anticipating this unprecedented surge in absentee ballots, the ACLU Analytics team generated estimates of absentee voting volume by race and candidate support by vote method in every county in the battleground states of Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Georgia. The team combined data gathered by a nationwide representative tracking survey conducted by YouGov with turnout modeling based on updated in-cycle ballot data to construct estimates through statistical modeling. Our findings identify which counties potentially face the largest racial representation gap — that is, if the absentee ballot count is not completed, they will cause the biggest disenfranchisement of voters of color. What happens in these counties may well change the course and outcome of the election.

Across all four states, we found that the key geographies to watch will be the greater metro areas with large populations of people of color, such as Detroit, Milwaukee, Madison, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Atlanta. Failing to fully count the absentee votes in the counties that are home to these metro areas would mean disregarding between 32.9 percent (in Gwinnett County, Georgia) and 61.4 percent (in Washtenaw County, Michigan) of the votes of people of color. 

While any call about the outcome of the election before many ballots are counted is improper,  the fact that Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania don’t begin processing ballots until Election Day or the day before increases the odds of confusing, unfounded, and premature victory calls before all ballots have been counted. Further, Georgia has the largest gap in vote-by-mail usage by race. While ballot processing can happen earlier, a time crunch and election staff shortages mean a quick count is not assured. 

Attempts to suppress the by-mail vote and the voices of voters of color — whether through delays, ballot rejections, or outright interference with the full count — can absolutely change the outcomes of the election this year. We must keep an eagle eye on the counties identified in our report and make sure the mail-in vote is counted completely and accurately. Mishandling or miscounting ballots in these counties could perpetuate the historical disenfranchisement of voters of color with which we are all too familiar. 

In spite of past elections that may have primed voters to expect a winner to be declared the night of the election, it’s vital for us all to remember that the official winner is never truly known on election night. In every election, the results called on election night are based on projections of unofficial tallies. Sufficient results to even make those projections may take days if not weeks, and for the sake of accuracy, that’s a good thing. This year, discounting the mail-in vote would disenfranchise voters of color and distort the election outcome. Ensuring that every vote — whether cast by mail, early, or in-person on Election Day — is counted must be the responsibility and priority of election officials everywhere. Pundits and politicians don’t decide the outcome of the election — voters do.

Lucia Tian, Chief Analytics Officer, ACLU