JERUSALEM — A New York-based lawyer who has been trying to file a lawsuit against President Donald Trump’s executive order on immigration is now getting some pushback from his fellow lawyers.
In a letter obtained by the Associated Press, a lawyer for an attorney representing an Arizona man accused of participating in the deadly attack on a Florida restaurant last month told ABC News that the government’s use of his client’s name in a national database should be treated as evidence of a crime.
The letter, obtained by The Associated Press under the Freedom of Information Act, also said that Trump has failed to provide the attorney with an opportunity to be heard.
Attorney Michael S. Seltzer, who represents John Doe 1, said the administration’s use is an abuse of power.
“The government has an obligation to make sure its case is credible, credible, and compelling,” Seltner said.
“The President’s executive orders are a complete sham.
He is a criminal.””
He’s not even aware of what his rights are.
He is a criminal.”
Trump said last week that he plans to sue California for failing to provide adequate security at his Mar-a-Lago resort, a comment he made on Twitter on March 16, hours before the deadly incident at a popular tourist destination.
The government has said that a federal law that requires hotel security to be at the highest levels of security is unconstitutional.
Seltzer said that the use of Doe1’s name was evidence that Trump had no real intent to make the immigration order a reality.
He said that, when he approached the Trump administration for a legal analysis of the case, he was told it was irrelevant to the case.
“What you’re really doing is saying, ‘We can’t believe you,'” Seltizer said.
He also questioned the legality of the use by the U.S. government of Doe 1’s name.
Soltzer said Trump should have known that his use of the name would be seen by the public as evidence that he was not serious about the order.
The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the letter.
The lawsuit against Trump has been brought by Seltzel, who said that he believes the president’s executive actions are illegal and are intended to create a nationwide registry for Muslims, which would be a violation of the First Amendment, which protects freedom of religion.
Slatzer, the law professor at New York University, has been pushing for Trump to take action on immigration since March, when Trump said he would order an “expeditious” review of immigration cases from a database of suspected terrorists.
He told ABC affiliate WUSA-TV in an interview last month that he’s still waiting for that review to take place.
“I’m still waiting,” he said.
Sometime this month, the Trump Justice Department will release a report that will detail its recommendations for Trump on how to combat terrorism.
The Trump administration has also ordered that Trump’s travel ban on six Muslim-majority countries be indefinitely suspended and that he withdraw the refugee resettlement program for 120,000 refugees.
Siegel said that while the Justice Department’s legal analysis is an important step forward, the White House still needs to address the issues raised by Selleman’s letter.
“If you’re going to take this to the WhiteHouse, you need to do it with real evidence,” he told ABC.
“And if the administration doesn’t do it, you have to take it to court.”