The Shadow Muslim Ban: Situs of Clinical Practice

Go Back

Session Type: Concurrent Sessions

Session Capacity: N/A

Hotel: N/A

Room: N/A

Floor: N/A

The Muslim Ban, especially in its first implementation in January 2017 garnered headlines the world over as Americans of every stripe flocked to airports to protest the President’s racist policy barring travel from a handful of Muslim countries. As the courts forced the Trump Administration to water down the overt racism in his executive orders, the administration responded in course. By the time the Supreme Court upheld the third iteration of the Ban on December 5, 2017, the hubbub around it had all but died down; there were no more massive protests at international terminals and while some intrepid immigration and civil rights attorneys, clinics, and organizations mobilized against the ban, the consensus was that the impact of the third and final version was well known. Most immigration advocates turned their attention to the executive order’s waiver process, with the goal of holding the administration accountable to its commitment to allow in certain individuals from Muslim majority countries who could adequately prove the desperation of their straits. As the saying goes, though, this all started before Trump. Informed by the nearly two decades of national security policy affecting Muslim communities which preceded the current administration, and motivated by the brazen language of the Muslim Ban’s initial articulation, the Department of Homeland Security has continued to implement a far-reaching Shadow Muslim Ban on a variety of fronts which both satisfies Trump’s clearly articulated racist motives, and escapes rigorous review in court, or in the court of public opinion. The Shadow Muslim Ban operates on interrelated legal, sub-legal, and extra-legal planes, which make it a unique space for clinical students and supervisors to practice together. This session will examine the case of Abdikadir Abdulahi Mohamed – a Somali Muslim man who was caught up in the Shadow Muslim Ban, and spent 17 months in immigration detention as a result. In detention, he developed a dangerous life-threatening disease. We will consider the limits of the immigration court in struggling against the Shadow Muslim Ban and for Abdi’s release, and the alternative advocacy tools we developed to address his unjust detention, including appeal to external legal bodies, press, medical professionals, broad-based organizing, and legislative advocacy. We will examine parallel systems where an analogic strategy might be useful and, importantly, the limits of such a strategy in a clinical setting.