On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 04:35:02PM -0600, Adam Roach wrote:
I think this highlights a gap between mtgvenue (which is producing documents
that will provide guidance to the IAOC on venue selection, typically years
in advance of the actual meetings) and the practicalities about what happens
if the facts on the ground change non-trivially in the interim.
The facts on the ground are undergoing non-trivial change even as this
discussion takes place. Last night, several separate court rulings were
issued that impose stays/TROs on this executive order. (One in Brooklyn, NY;
one in Alexandria, VA; one in Massachusetts; one in Seattle, WA. There
may be more than I'm not aware of yet.)
There are likely to be more legal challenges. And based on real-time
reports from airports, there is clearly, at his moment, a very serious
disconnect between what the executive order says, what the courts are
saying, and what's being done to people.
Note also that the executive order affects US-based people: if they leave
the country (for a meeting or otherwise) they may be barred from re-entry.
So it's not just US-based meetings that raise issues.
---rsk