This is a bombshell study from the Center for Immigration Studies based on a report by the Senate Judiciary Committee's subcommittee on immigration. It says that 72 US residents convicted of serious terrorism charges were born in countries that president Trump wants to target for extreme vetting.

The appeals court ruled that there was "no evidence" that any terrorists came from those countries.

Washington Examiner:

According to a report out Saturday, at least 17 claimed to be refugees from those nations, three came in as "students," and 25 eventually became U.S. citizens.

The Center for Immigration Studies calculated the numbers of convicted terrorists from the Trump Seven:

— Somalia: 20

 

— Yemen: 19

— Iraq: 19

— Syria: 7

— Iran: 4

— Libya: 2

 

The Center's director of policy studies, Jessica M. Vaughan, based her blockbuster report on a 2016 report from the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest, then chaired by new Attorney General Jeff Sessions, that report found that 380 out of 580 people convicted in terror cases since 9/11 were foreign-born.

She received further information on many in the report to conclude that 72 of those convicted of terrorism come from the seven nations target by Trump.

From her report seen here:

These immigrant terrorists lived in at least 16 different states, with the largest number from the terror-associated countries living in New York (10), Minnesota (8), California (8), and Michigan (6). Ironically, Minnesota was one of the states suing to block Trump's order to pause entries from the terror-associated countries, claiming it harmed the state. At least two of the terrorists were living in Washington, which joined with Minnesota in the lawsuit to block the order.

Thirty-three of the 72 individuals from the seven terror-associated countries were convicted of very serious terror-related crimes, and were sentenced to at least three years imprisonment. The crimes included use of a weapon of mass destruction, conspiracy to commit a terror act, material support of a terrorist or terror group, international money laundering conspiracy, possession of explosives or missiles, and unlawful possession of a machine gun.

In dismissing the Trump executive order, San Francisco's Ninth Circuit court of appeals said, "The government has pointed to no evidence...that any alien from any of the countries named in the order has perpetrated a terrorist attack in the United States."

Is this study a game changer? It certainly buttresses the administration's case that more vetting is needed for citizens from the 7 countries in question. But the appeals court judges were not interested in facts, the law, or the Constitution. They were looking for anything to justify striking down Trump's travel ban and increased vetting proceduresand ignoring evidence to the contrary was necessary to do it.

Moving forward, the Trump administration is likely to issue a new executive order early next week. Citing this study should help in the court challenge sure to come.