The Atlantic

The Travel Ban's Ignominious Precedents

In the past, deference to bigotry in the name of national security has led to injustice, persecution, disgrace, and apology.
Source: Joshua Roberts / Reuters

“When the government wants to do something, it has to give a reason,” former acting Solicitor General Walter Dellinger once said. “When it wants to do something bad, it has to give a really good reason.” I begin my introductory constitutional-law course every year with Dellinger’s rule. Governments must give reasons, because governments don’t have rights. They have powers—“just powers” derived, as the Declaration of Independence says, “from the consent of the governed,” and to be used, and honestly explained, for the good of the public.

That is what “limited government” means: Government must explain itself honestly, both to citizens and, if necessary, to courts. That principle is at the heart of the system of judicial review.

But there’s one place where courts seem to believe it doesn’t apply—that spooky constitutional Sargasso where immigration and national-security law flow together. For the past century and more, executive officials have told the federal

You're reading a preview, sign up to read more.

More from The Atlantic

The Atlantic4 min readPolitics
Democrats Avoided the Toughest Debate Questions on Abortion
In part one of the Democratic Party’s first primary debates, the candidates did not go deep on substance.
The Atlantic5 min read
The Fury of the Prep-School Parents
An elite-college education is one of the few expensive things that is for sale, but that not everyone is allowed to buy.
The Atlantic3 min readPolitics
The Atlantic Politics & Policy Daily: And Then There Were 10
Tomorrow there will be ... 10 more Democratic 2020 candidates sharing a debate stage. Plus: How a home-goods company got tangled up in the migrant-detention crisis.