+
upworthy

executive order

Sally Yates just testified for the first time about her now-legendary refusal to defend Trump's travel ban — and, predictably, she didn't come to play around.

Photo by Eric Thayer/Getty Images.

In the key exchange, the former acting-attorney general calmly explained to Sen. John Cornyn why she refused to defend what she called an "unlawful" executive order.

She couldn't, in good conscious, she said, send Department of Justice attorneys in to lie on the administration's behalf about what the purpose of the executive order really was: an attempt to discriminate against Muslims.


SALLY YATES: All arguments have to be based on truth because we're the Department of Justice. We're not just a law firm. We're the Department of Justice.
CORNYN: Do you distinguish the truth from lawful?
YATES: Yes, because in this instance, in looking at what the intent was of the executive order, which was derived in part from an analysis of facts outside the face of the order, that is part of what led to our conclusion that it was not lawful.

The outside facts Yates considered in making her decision were public statements made by officials involved with the drafting of the order — statements that contradicted the administration's assertion that the order was not intentionally discriminatory.

Though Yates didn't clarify which statements she was referring to, possible candidates include President Trump's call for a "total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States" and campaign advisor Rudy Giuliani's admission that, following the election, Trump had asked him about instituting a Muslim travel ban — specifically "how to do it legally."

Basically, Yates believed that Trump's insistence that the order wasn't a Muslim ban was BS and felt it would be unprofessional to argue that BS in court.

"I believed that any argument that we would have to make in its defense would not be grounded in the truth," she said, bluntly, later in the May 8, 2017, hearing.

Yates metaphorically dunking on her Senate critics was more than satisfying to watch — it was a model of principled resistance.

The former Justice Department official drove her point home by clarifying her belief that following orders, even compelling ones, is less important than sticking up for the truth — no matter what the professional consequences might be.

Image via C-SPAN3.

"I looked at this, I made a determination that I believed that it was unlawful," Yates said of the executive order. "I also thought that it was inconsistent with the principles of the Department of Justice. And I said no. And that's what I promised you I would do, and that's what I did."

In the end, by refusing to defend an order she felt was unlawful, Yates didn't just do the right thing.

"I did my job," she explained. Thankfully, someone did.

More

5 real things you can do right now to fight Donald Trump's 'Muslim ban.'

The president's executive order is a shocking reversal of American values.

On January 27, 2017, President Donald Trump enacted harsh restrictions on immigration and refugee intake via executive order.

Titled "Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States," the executive order has the effect of placing a hold on the U.S. refugee program and restricts travel from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. The order also stipulates that of the refugees who are let into the country, Christians will be prioritized over Muslims.

Photo by Pete Marovich - Pool/Getty Images.


Within hours of the order's signing, its effects became clear. At major U.S. airports around the country, more than two dozen individuals covered by the newly implemented restrictions were detained upon arrival. Additionally, the Department of Homeland Security confirmed that the order would also have the effect of banning green card holders from seven countries from re-entering the U.S. In all, the order could block up to 500,000 legal U.S. residents from exiting and re-entering the country.

Though the administration has insisted this is not a "Muslim ban," Muslims will be disproportionately affected by Trump's actions. In December 2015, then-candidate Trump called for "a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on." For what it's worth, Michael Flynn Jr., son of Trump's National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, celebrated the order on Twitter as a "Muslim ban."

Protestors rally during a protest at John F. Kennedy International Airport on Jan. 28, 2017. Photo by Stephanie Keith/Getty Images.

Banning people on the basis of where they're from or what their religion is, is quintessentially un-American. It's a slap in the face to the men and women who founded this country on a principle of religious liberty, and it's a show of disrespect for the men and women who have put their lives on the line to protect our national ideals at home and abroad.

Since the order was signed, people have taken to the streets in protests, donated to causes dedicated to ensuring the safety and rights of immigrants and refugees, and legal challenges have already begun to work their way through the courts, with stays reportedly being issued Saturday evening to halt any immediate deportations.

The fight on this is just beginning. Here are five things you can do right now to help:

1. Donate to causes supporting legal challenges to the order.

The American Civil Liberties Union has filed suit against the Trump administration, arguing that his executive order is unconstitutional.

The ACLU filed the lawsuit along with the International Refugee Assistance Project at the Urban Justice Center, the National Immigration Law Center, Yale Law School’s Jerome N. Frank Legal Services Organization, and the firm Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton.

On Twitter, musical artist Sia announced matching donations to the ACLU up to $100,000, and entrepreneur Chris Sacca said he would match donations up to $75,000.

2. Join a protest.

As news of the challenges facing the detained travelers emerged, protesters began showing up at the affected airports with a simple message: This is not who we are.

ThinkProgress has a running list of upcoming protests against the ban.

Photo by Stephanie Keith/Getty Images.

3. Donate to the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

In the lead-up to last year's election, anti-Muslim sentiment seemed to be on the rise. In the months since, documented instances of Islamophobic attacks and hate crimes have seen a spike. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is a civil rights advocacy organization that works to resolve instances of anti-Muslim discrimination through mediation, negotiation, public pressure, and legal action.

On Twitter, musician Grimes offered to match donations to CAIR up to $10,000.

4. Call your lawmakers.

Where do your politicians stand on Trump's executive order? Have they released any sort of statement? Either way, it's a great chance to reach out to their offices. Representatives and senators cannot single-handedly undo an executive order, but they can put pressure on the administration to roll back the changes.

Photo by Stephanie Keith/Getty Images.

A number of lawmakers from both parties have spoken out against the order on social media. Even if your representatives have taken a stand against the order, you can call to say thanks.

5. Speak out, speak up, and let it be known that this is not who America is.

No matter how we voted in November, we are all a part of the same country — and that country should be a welcome home for all.

To paraphrase Emma Lazarus: We should aim to be a welcoming home to the tired, the poor, the huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the homeless, and the tempest-tossed. That's the America we should aspire to be.

So tell your friends, tell your families, share messages of support on social media. We don't need to fear the unknown. In fact, the odds of an American dying as the result of an act of terrorism carried out by a refugee is a minuscule 1 in 3.64 billion in any given year.

Photo by Stephanie Keith/Getty Images.

More

5 reasons to close Guantanamo Bay and a 4-step plan to get there.

President Obama addressed the nation about closing Guantanamo Bay.

It's been seven years, one month, and one day since President Barack Obama ordered the closing of Guantanamo Bay.

The executive order was one of the very first things he did upon arrival in office, signing it on Jan. 22, 2009. All these years later, though, and the detention center in Cuba remains very much open. Why? Congress has repeatedly voted to keep the facility open, not transfer its inmates elsewhere, and other moves designed to stall.

For years, the facility has remained home to suspected terrorists, though many were never so much as charged with a crime. It's an end-around in our judicial system — which, as the president has noted on multiple occasions, has a pretty solid track record when it comes to convicting terrorists — and a recruiting tool for our country's enemies.


Still, it remains open.

Photo by John Moore/Getty Images.

Nearing the end of his second term, the president isn't ready to give up on his goal of closing the facility. And so today, he addressed the American people, outlining a clear plan to shut it down.

The four-part plan involves everything from working with other countries to working with Congress. The whole thing — in all its details — can be found on the Department of Defense website.

GIFs from The White House/YouTube.

There's simply no reason to keep it open, and closing it should be a bipartisan goal.

And the president outlined five reasons we need to close it now.

1. It's not effective.

2. Its existence has been used as a terrorist recruiting tool.

3. It's expensive.

4. In the past, Republicans have supported its closure.

5. We pride ourselves on being a free and just society. This doesn't reflect that.

"This is about closing a chapter in our history. It reflects the lessons we've learned since 9/11," Obama said.

Keeping people held without charges at Guantanamo Bay does not keep us any safer than trying them in federal court. What it does, however, is stain our country's legacy.

It's time to move past that.

You can watch the president's complete remarks below.

Earlier this week, the Ted Cruz campaign posted this image on its official website:

Photo from Tedcruz.org, via TalkingPointsMemo.


The fundraising page and image were a response to Obama's executive order that tightened up a few existing gun laws.

The president's order expands the enforcement of background check laws to private and online dealers that sell firearms, initiates an overhaul of the FBI's background check system, and includes a proposal for increased investment in mental health care, among other things.

Many more vocal gun rights advocates worry that any change to America's gun laws — even a limited one — is one step on a "slippery slope" to all guns being banned.

A few presidential candidates other than Cruz have made statements to that effect. Media outlets and the NRA have also pressed the charge in recent months.

There is, however, one person who is pretty sure Obama isn't coming to take anyone's guns: President Obama.

Photo by Aude Guerrucci/Getty Images.

At a CNN Town Hall last night, the president categorically dismissed the accusation, which he described as as a false "notion of a conspiracy."

Anderson Cooper pressed him on that characterization...

Cooper: ... now, let me just jump in here, is it fair to call it a conspiracy...

And Obama replied...

Obama: ... well, yeah...

Obama pointed out that, in his seven years as president, he hasn't moved to try to confiscate any guns, and wouldn't be starting any time soon.

"Well, look, I mean, I'm only going to be here for another year. I don't know — when — when would I have started on this enterprise, right?" the president told Cooper.

Those who agree with President Obama about the need for tighter gun laws —and those who don't — need to do a better job of listening to what the other side is actually saying.

People on both sides of the issue have valid points that deserve to be heard, debated, and examined.

But good faith is too often missing from the discussion.

A gun shop in Las Vegas, which says it saw a spike in sales after President Obama was elected. Photo by Ethan Miller/Getty Images.

Too many on the "anti-gun" side have convinced themselves that most gun owners are irresponsible and just trying to stockpile weapons for the fun of it.

Too many on the "pro-gun" side believe that common sense gun control measures mean the government coming to their door, raiding their gun lockers, and carrying away all their expensive firearms.

Overheated rhetoric makes it harder to do the things most of us agree on.

Photo by Jeff Schear/Getty Images.

At the moment, the gun debate feels like a game of dodgeball. Team Pro-Gun vs. Team Anti-Gun. NRA vs. Everytown. Republican vs. Democrat. Which is a shame, because — with the U.S. topping 30,000 gun deaths per year in recent years — most of us really, really want to meet in the middle (and not throw big rubber balls at each other).

Over 70% of Americans oppose banning handguns. At the same time, 85% of all Americans — gun owners and non-gun owners alike — support background checks of the kind that Obama's executive order calls for. 70% support a federal database to track gun sales. Nearly 60% support a ban on assault weapons.

These are easy things we can do.

The vast majority of gun owners are responsible, and the vast majority of those who support stricter gun laws don't want to take anyone's guns.

That's the bottom line — and a great starting place for a discussion we Americans should probably get going on, pronto.

Now that we've gotten that, let's go team.

Aight? Aight.