A majority in the US House of Representatives voted in a vote condemning President Donald Trump for his verbal attacks against four female Congressmen of the Democrats. The mood is mainly symbolic and has no concrete consequences for Trump.
Four Republicans and one independent congresswoman agreed with all Democrats in the condemnation of the “tweet storm” of Trump. He said last Sunday that the four women “should go back to the country where they come from and work there for the failed and plagued places.”
If they criticize the United States so much, they are free to leave the country, Trump said. A day later, the president had repeated his remarks again. He also called the women “a bunch of Communists”. He also said he was absolutely not racist.
“These statements from the White House are disgraceful and disgusting and they are racist,” said President Nancy Pelosi, the leader of the Democrats. With the adopted resolution, the House condemned “Trump’s racist remarks that legitimize and reinforce fear and hatred of new Americans and colored people.”
Pelosi’s remarks led to a two-hour debate at the House, after Republicans had said they had gone too far and violated the House’s debate rules.
Kevin McCarthy, the leader of the Republicans in the House, had called on his party members to vote against the resolution because it was politically motivated. “It’s all political,” he said.
Meanwhile, American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) civil rights organization has started a case against President Donald Trump’s new immigration rules. “This is the most extreme attempt by the Trump government to establish an asylum ban so far. This ban violates national and international laws, “said the ACLU lawyer.
In the new rules, Trump has included the provision that people cannot get asylum in the US if they have traveled through another country before their arrival where they are protected against persecution and torture, for example. The migrants must then apply for asylum in the country where they were previously. With this, Trump hopes to dampen the flow of migrants on the southern border.
The case is before a California state judge. The ACLU and a few other groups filed the case on behalf of four migrant aid organizations.