Will travel-ban controversy serve as teachable moment?

Regardless of what ultimately happens to President Donald J. Trump’s refugee and immigration ban, we hope that the public outcry and legal battles triggered by the decision will give him pause.

We use the word “hope” because thus far Trump, who won the presidency by running a very unconventional campaign, has shown little interest in listening to a wide range of opinions before arriving at a decision.

Indeed, his use of Twitter to signal what he intends to do has all but rendered his White House advisers to a silence-of-the-lambs role. They are seen in the Oval Office, but not heard.

During the hotly contested election, we voiced our concern that Trump’s behavior on the campaign trail made clear that he sees no difference between being the head of a global private company and the leader of the most power nation in the world.

The fact that he had never run for public office before his bid for the presidency and had never served in government leads to the conclusion that he has a different perspective of what it means to occupy the White House.

His reaction last week to a federal judge’s order temporarily blocking the refugee and immigration ban also suggests that he isn’t impressed with the constitutional system of checks and balances involving the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government.

U.S. District Court Judge James Robart in Washington state issued his ruling that suspended enforcement of the ban based on his reading of the law, and immediately suffered the wrath of the president.

Trump, who on Jan. 27 signed an executive order suspending America’s refugee program and halting immigration to the U.S. from seven Muslim-majority countries, went on Twitter to mock the judge.

The president referred to Robart as a “so-called Judge” and characterized his opinion as “ridiculous.” He also insisted that the ruling “will be overturned.”

NOTICE OF APPEAL

On Saturday, the U.S. Justice Department filed notice that the administration would appeal the judge’s order. However, government lawyers were unable to persuade the federal appeals court to stay the lower court’s ruling.

It appears this case is headed for the U.S. Supreme Court. The issue centers on this question: Does Trump’s 90-day ban on all refugees and immigration from the Muslim-majority countries amount to discrimination on the basis of religion?

While Trump and his underlings insist that he is not targeting Muslims, the broad language used in the executive order and insight into the formulation of the policy provided by former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani lead to the conclusion that there was not adequate examination by White House advisers and the relevant departments of the extreme immigration vetting policy being pursued by the president.

Indeed, Ohio’s Republican U.S. Sen. Rob Portman attracted national attention when he offered this insightful observation:

“It is a temporary ban, as I understand it. In my view, we ought to all take a deep breath and come up with something that makes sense for our national security and for this notion that America has always been a welcoming home for refugees and immigrants.

In fact, we are more welcoming than any country in the world, and we should continue to be so.”

This isn’t a question of whether the president has the authority to do whatever is necessary to secure the nation’s safety. He does. What is of concern is the manner in which the policy was rolled out and the unforeseen ramifications. Hundreds of permanent residents (green- card holders) and visitors with legal visas were already flying to the U.S. and were subsequently blocked at the airports from entering the country.

There was so much confusion and uncertainty on the part of customs and immigration officials that changes to Trump’s executive order had to be made on the fly, so to speak.

Now, it’s up to the courts to decide whether the president overstepped his authority. On the other hand, it is entirely up to Trump to decide if there are any lessons to be learned from what he sought to achieve through his executive order and what ultimately occurred as a result of the lack of clarity with the language and his failure to consider the fallout.

These are early days in the new administration, but there also are teachable moments that the president and his advisers would be wise to contemplate.