There's been a lot of heated discussion over President Trump's Executive Order suspending immigration from seven nations suspected of harboring terrorism, as well as suspending visa processing. WA Attorney General Bob Ferguson has filed a lawsuit against Trump. But according to the National Review, Trump's order does not violate the Constitution. Here's why.

The 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act originally allowed a President to prohibit access or even ban certain people or groups from entering the U.S. if they were deemed to bring harm or danger to the country. In 1965 it was amended to include the statement: "(It) banned all discrimination against immigrants on the basis of national origin."

This is the basis of Ferguson's lawsuit, and others who oppose the Executive Order. He, and other opponents believe this is why it's a violation. However, the National Review points out the purpose of Trumps order is this:

"Trump’s executive order, to the contrary, is in no way an effort to affect the racial or ethnic composition of the nation or its incoming immigrants. The directive is an effort to protect national security from a terrorist threat, which, as we shall see, Congress itself has found to have roots in specified Muslim-majority countries."
In this article, writer Andrew C. McCarthy points out Trump actually left out a few nations that are suspected of also having terrorist cells, such as Saudi Arabia, but says the Order is only intended to last until the U.S. can sort out and improve it's immigration security and screening processes. McCarthy finishes with this statement:
"For now, there is no doubt that the executive order temporarily banning entry from specified Muslim-majority countries is both well within President Trump’s constitutional authority and consistent with statutory law."

More From 870 AM KFLD