Apple, Google, Facebook join 94 others in legal brief against Trump's immigration

midian182

Posts: 6,555   +58
Staff member

Ever since Donald Trump announced his immigration ban two weeks ago, tech industry rivals have been unified in their opposition against the order. But now the firms are making their resistance official: 97 different companies, including Apple, Google, and Facebook, have filed an amicus brief condemning the President’s policy.

The brief was filed late Sunday evening with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. It argues that the ban is illegal, discriminatory, and hinders US companies by making the hiring of new employees from around the world more expensive and difficult. The firms say it will also have a negative effect on how they do business because of travel restrictions on their employees.

The Order effects a sudden shift in the rules governing entry into the United States, and is inflicting substantial harm on U.S. companies. It hinders the ability of American companies to attract great talent; increases costs imposed on business; makes it more difficult for American firms to compete in the international market-place; and gives global enterprises a new, significant incentive to build operations — and hire new employees — outside the United States.

The brief notes other immigration laws that were eventually overturned, including the Literacy Act and the Johnson-Reed Act.

The filing follows the temporary lifting of the ban by Seattle Federal Judge James Robart on Friday after hearing arguments from Washington state and Minnesota. An appeal by the government to have it immediately restored was rejected early on Sunday. “Just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril,” Trump wrote on Twitter. “If something happens blame him and court system. People pouring in. Bad!”

As noted by TechCrunch, a few notable absences from the list are Amazon, Oracle, IBM, Space X, and Tesla. While Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos has been critical of Trump in the past, he has yet to speak out against the order. And both Oracle and IBM have been conspicuously quiet since Trump unveiled the ban.

As for Elon Musk, the Tesla/Space X boss recently announced that he would be staying on Trump’s advisory board, unlike Uber CEO Travis Kalanick, as he believes the best way to bring about change is to remain on the forum.

Virtually every large US tech firm has opposed the ban, be it with actions, words, or both. Several companies have started funds that will be donated to immigration charities, or to help employees affected by the order.

The brief follows last week’s news that several tech giants are in the process of writing a formal letter of protest to the President.

Here's the full list of companies participating in the brief:

  • AdRoll
  • Aeris Communications
  • Airbnb
  • AltSchool
  • Ancestry.com
  • Appboy
  • Apple
  • AppNexus
  • Asana
  • Atlassian
  • Autodesk
  • Automattic
  • Box
  • Brightcove
  • Brit + Co
  • CareZone
  • Castlight Health
  • Checkr
  • Chobani
  • Citrix Systems
  • Cloudera
  • Cloudflare
  • Copia Institute
  • DocuSign
  • DoorDash
  • Dropbox
  • Dynatrace
  • eBay
  • Engine Advocacy
  • Etsy
  • Facebook
  • Fastly
  • Flipboard
  • Foursquare
  • Fuze
  • General Assembly
  • GitHub
  • Glassdoor
  • Google
  • GoPro
  • Harmonic
  • Hipmunk
  • Indigogo
  • Intel
  • JAND d/b/a Warby Parker
  • Kargo
  • Kickstarter
  • KIND
  • Knotel
  • Levi Strauss & Co.
  • LinkedIn
  • Lithium Technologies
  • Lyft
  • Mapbox
  • Maplebear d/b/a Instacart
  • Marin Software
  • Medallia
  • Medium
  • Meetup
  • Microsoft
  • Motivate International
  • Mozilla
  • Netflix
  • Netgear
  • NewsCred
  • Patreon
  • PayPal
  • Pinterest
  • Quora
  • Reddit
  • Rocket Fuel
  • SaaStr
  • Salesforce
  • Scopely
  • Shutterstock
  • Snap
  • Spokeo
  • Spotify
  • Square
  • Squarespace
  • Strava
  • Stripe
  • SurveyMonkey
  • TaskRabbit
  • Tech:NYC
  • Thumbtack
  • Turn
  • Twilio
  • Twitter
  • Turn
  • Uber
  • Via
  • Wikimedia Foundation
  • Workday
  • Y Combinator
  • Yelp
  • Zynga 

Permalink to story.

 

Skidmarksdeluxe

Posts: 8,645   +3,288
And when nothing gets done about their complaint, those complaining will devise and adapt to other methods. It's normal human behaviour to resist change but when that can't be overcome, there is no other solution other than acceptance and adapting... or ceasing to exist. We are only guaranteed 3 things in life which are change, death and paying taxes.
 
Last edited:

frostyshield

Posts: 87   +89
That moment when companies hire people from syria and war zones... Kinda makes you wonder how these terrorists end up with high end gear these companies don't exactly help.

Not saying don't take in refugee's but it seems these companies are a little too happy to increase their "Diversity" what ever that means.
 

Uncle Al

Posts: 8,001   +6,775
You might want to take a look at the state department web site at exactly what is done during the vetting process. It is very similar to the process for granting top security clearances. I think it would have been more successful if he had gone after the countries that have documented terrorists that have harmed Americans rather than those that are embroiled in their own issues.

Not saying it's a totally bad idea, but in what is becoming all too familiar Trump fashion, shooting from the hip rarely breeds success. Maybe in the Real Estate world, but for the big world, one must tread slower and much more deliberate. Judging from his all too frequent tweets, he's sounding like a spoiled 9 year old that dosen't like it when he doesn't get his way.
 

Cycloid Torus

Posts: 4,712   +1,515
Being an 'alt-middle' kind of guy, I ask "Why ban?"

President Trump may have a valid issue with the manner in which screening has been done. If so and other better ideas exist, I would hope that he can implement them in rapid order. I'm puzzled as to why he chose 'ban' instead of modification - the existing process is pretty thorough as it is.

That being so, then the 'ban' was in order to demonstrate 'decisiveness', 'wisdom' and 'leadership'.

I'm not sure it succeeded. A lot of important sectors responded with "OUCH". Now it is up to the courts.
 

Capaill

Posts: 1,199   +742
Ok, I'll play with you Rippleman.
If you are putting emphasis on the word "is" (hard to tell from your overuse of caps lock) then you're absolutely right - there IS no immigration ban. Because a judge saw that it was going to lose in various legal challenges and he got it dropped. But you can bet that Trump is working the system to get the ban brought back into effect and he needs to be shown the downside of such a ban in terms of its impact on American business.
If you mean that a suggestion has been made that the ban blocks immigration from all countries then of course we all know it's only for 7 specific countries. And because we all know it, there is no need for the write(r) to say it.
Or did you mean something else?
 
D

davislane1

The proper stance on this from the sell side is to keep your mouth shut if you are against the measures. Taking a public stance like this plays to the minority of people in this country who are either foreigners or progressives, but opens you up to have the whole thing thrown right back in your face the next time is a terrorist attack, because now, we've got it in writing that you opposed action that may have prevented said attack.* It's placing short-term gains ahead of long-term risks.

In any event, this is heading to the SCOTUS, where the advantage goes to Trump. One would hope they uphold the temporary ban and that Trump follows up with a more comprehensive approach a few months down the road. Specifically, one that establishes bans on known terrorism sponsors like the current ban does, but also establishes quotas from different regions that will have the effect of halting or reversing current demographic trends.

*Perception is what matters here, not "reality."
 

Kibaruk

Posts: 3,836   +1,186
I wonder if the people working closely with Trump facepalm each time he makes a tweet. It's amazing how little vocabulary he puts in use, if you wouldn't know his name by now you would never think he is actually the president of the united states.

Back on topic, the companies are not complaining on a "ban" since it just raised the requisites to bring in skilled out of the states workers, the problem being hiring cheap work force from the outside because "muricans" don't want to work apparently. Probably they don't want to work on those companies due to low them being low paying positions, reason why they have to bring people. So what Trump is actually trying to do is to open up to local workforce, but for the companies this means to raise wages one way or the other, either paying more to bring now not so cheap workforce or paying what a murican would actually work for.
 
D

davislane1

I wonder if the people working closely with Trump facepalm each time he makes a tweet. It's amazing how little vocabulary he puts in use, if you wouldn't know his name by now you would never think he is actually the president of the united states.

Because people with the Silver Tongue perk do well by their constituents.
 

amstech

Posts: 2,643   +1,807
If your against this your just another whiny millennial pansy who has had everything handed to them. This country needs to get its backbone again, I have no issue with Trumps decision.
 
D

davislane1

Gotta love using the word BAN...
it isn't a ban, it's a DELAY, until people are checked...PROPERLY.
Several presidents have delayed people coming into this country.
Heck, Jimmy Carter even sent a lot of Iranians home in 79/80.

Democrats can do no wrong.
 

Badonk4

Posts: 30   +21
The us is just such a joke. Its president and policies a farce, as usual. If Trump wants to stop terrorism, then he should ban people from leaving the us, not the other way around. But as usual, the marginal terrorism conducted by individuals and fringe groups in other countries, is what gets all the attention. Despite the real terrorism being firmly that which is dished out by the us and other countries like the uk. Both military and economic terrorism. But hey ho, nevermind that. Let's worry about the off chance someone from the ME does something bad in the us - even though americans kill each other by the thousands every year due to guns. Guns which Trump of course supports the use of. As usual with the us, it's just a big big joke - sadly many americans can't acknowledge this. Those tech companies also seem very liberal. It's amazing how eager they are to jump on the bandwagon to get some good publicity, but will otherwise sell out their own country and its people at all other times. Hey apple, hows your manufacturing in China going? Not that I mind China, but this is just so superficial. Leave or stay, the economic base for those companies will still be rotten.
 

Kibaruk

Posts: 3,836   +1,186
Because people with the Silver Tongue perk do well by their constituents.
Yes because Trump is an average Joe... this is so much very really bad, as very much bad and really really dangerous as the people that are coming into the land of opportunities (I know... on the internet no one knows you are really a cat... but read with sarcasm and extra emphasis on the so much very really and really really).

If your against this your just another whiny millennial pansy who has had everything handed to them. This country needs to get its backbone again, I have no issue with Trumps decision.
You're*. And no, you're damn straight wrong on so many levels, but Murican so... what else can you expect right?
 

Kibaruk

Posts: 3,836   +1,186
The only time 97 companies get together, is when someone is messing with their pockets, which is actually happening by forcing salaries.
 

Evernessince

Posts: 5,464   +6,145
Being an 'alt-middle' kind of guy, I ask "Why ban?"

President Trump may have a valid issue with the manner in which screening has been done. If so and other better ideas exist, I would hope that he can implement them in rapid order. I'm puzzled as to why he chose 'ban' instead of modification - the existing process is pretty thorough as it is.

That being so, then the 'ban' was in order to demonstrate 'decisiveness', 'wisdom' and 'leadership'.

I'm not sure it succeeded. A lot of important sectors responded with "OUCH". Now it is up to the courts.

I'm guessing he's going to go the same route he did with Obamacare. Say screw the hole thing to start and then quickly realize that the processes we have in place is pretty good and really just needs a few changes.

Gotta love using the word BAN...
it isn't a ban, it's a DELAY, until people are checked...PROPERLY.
Several presidents have delayed people coming into this country.
Heck, Jimmy Carter even sent a lot of Iranians home in 79/80.

It's called a ban because President Trump called it a ban.

If your against this your just another whiny millennial pansy who has had everything handed to them. This country needs to get its backbone again, I have no issue with Trumps decision.

This line of dialogue isn't constructive. It's pretty hypocritical to support Trump, a candidate who stirred up, as you put it, "whiny" voters with complaints. Unless you somehow have a double standard.
 
D

davislane1

Yes because Trump is an average Joe... this is so much very really bad, as very much bad and really really dangerous as the people that are coming into the land of opportunities (I know... on the internet no one knows you are really a cat... but read with sarcasm and extra emphasis on the so much very really and really really).

That's gonna be a swing and a miss. Here's the anatomy of the pitch:

Using simple language is a more effective way of communicating than trying to sound "educated." The former is how most people normally talk. They talk that way because it effectively gets their point across without undue burden on them or their audience. The latter is how academics and theorists talk. They use large, meticulously crafted paragraphs, syllable-laden words, and rhetorically effective terminology to woo their audience with a cacophony of linguistic broadsides that only the terminally vain and the clueless have the inclination to endure.

As a point of fact, I once aced a 20-page business term paper in an afternoon by taking a 1-page bulleted list and randomly adding 3-5 additional sentences explaining segments of each topic sentence with references. The actual substance of the paper could have been elucidated in about 1,200 words (2 pages), effectively communicating both the pertinent information as well as some of the more superfluous tidbits required by the assignment, but the finished product had a post-graduate level reading score and an A grade to boot.

Now, here's the exact same response, spoken like an "uneducated" person:

The only people who care about fancy language are the ones with more diplomas than education.
 

amstech

Posts: 2,643   +1,807
You're*. And no, you're damn straight wrong on so many levels, but Murican so... what else can you expect right?
Do not let schooling get in the way of your education.
On the outside it looks like I am just another 'Merica' supporter but most people who think his methods are unjust come from a twisted, uneducated and spoiled point of view. You think you know what your talking about, but you don't.
I am wrong on so many levels? Lol, ok.

Letting someone cross a border, have a child and having it automatically become a citizen I pay taxes for is wrong on so many levels. Try and pull that one off, I dare you. Go ahead, go to Afghanistan and have your wife crap out a kid there, see what happens and how much free money/aid you get.

This is part of the "everyone passes class, no one fails, everyone wins, soft American b!tch" type of thinking (
) the US abides by now, but few, if any other country's would be so forgiving.

You think Trump is keeping foreigners out, what he is really doing is keeping track of the ones that are in.
The Clinton Administration was full of the same ideals of being very nice to all people that want to enter our country. There is nothing wrong with that, but if you went to Russia or Germany and did this, you would get arrested or shot:
http://www.theweepingeagle.com/2010/06/muslim-call-to-prayers-in-ny-city.html

Do you know what Russian Police do to an illegal immigrant? They beat the living sh!t out of them and throw them back, some of them are never heard of again.
The door to the USA is not swinging open anymore, too bad if offends or effects the lives of decent ones, that's not the point.
Living in the USA is a privilege, not a right.
You think Trumps policies are against us being a multi-national country your wrong.. It's against a multi-cultural country. If your in the USA, speak English, abide by American rules and pay taxes, or GTFO. Too many freeloaders, Mexican/foreign inmates, and bItchy cItizens like you trying to please everyone.
 
Last edited:

Kibaruk

Posts: 3,836   +1,186
That's gonna be a swing and a miss. Here's the anatomy of the pitch.
That's the thing, it's a hit and miss because it appeals to something that Trump is not yet it's seen kind of. People expect at least a well written sentence from the president of their country.

Letting someone cross a border, have a child and having it automatically become a citizen I pay taxes for is wrong on so many levels.
This is kind of funny, in your head people are still "living the American Dream".

Btw: I did not laugh about Trump's "Ban" on travel, but on how you seem to lack understanding of what they are actually doing and by calling everyone a whiny millennial, making no point and just sounding like your average 'murican.

However please do let me know how it goes when inflation starts striking after you get a backbone again (Imposed "better" wages, increased production costs, higher sale price, more money less valuable, inflation. Increased wages =/= More money. More taxes =/= punishment on producers, the average Joe ends up paying it).
 
D

davislane1

Never fails. The grammar policeman falls on his own sword immediately:

That's the thing, it's a hit and miss because it appeals to something that Trump is not yet it's seen kind of. People expect at least a well written sentence from the president of their country.