Wakeforest22890
Snowpom
Just read Washington and Minnesota's brief.
It seems to me that the government is going to have trouble (credibly) arguing that 1182(f) gives permission to ban on the basis of national origin since 1152(a) was passed 13 years later than 1182(f). Obviously Congress was aware of what 1182(f) said when it passed 1152(a), but also 1152(a) provides specific exemptions as to when nationality could be taken into account. 1182(f) is not an included exception.
I find this to be a fairly persuasive argument that the government cannot use 1182(f) to ban on the basis of national origin.
It seems to me that the government is going to have trouble (credibly) arguing that 1182(f) gives permission to ban on the basis of national origin since 1152(a) was passed 13 years later than 1182(f). Obviously Congress was aware of what 1182(f) said when it passed 1152(a), but also 1152(a) provides specific exemptions as to when nationality could be taken into account. 1182(f) is not an included exception.
I find this to be a fairly persuasive argument that the government cannot use 1182(f) to ban on the basis of national origin.