Statue of Liberty comes to Sydney as part of Australia-wide Trump protest

FURIOUS Aussies have taken to the streets across the nation to call on the President to back down over his controversial policies.

Ming Yu Hah said the Statue of Liberty represented freedom.

THE Statue of Liberty came to Sydney’s CBD today as part of an Australia-wide protest against Donald Trump’s travel ban.

Activists dressed as the iconic New York landmark joined placard-waving demonstrators in Martin Place to call for the President to revoke the executive order preventing immigration from six Muslim-majority countries.

Campaigner Ming Yu Hah said she and Katy MacKay, who works in digital communications, had chosen to dress up as the famous statue because it represented freedom and welcoming immigrants to the US.

“The Statue of Liberty is an iconic American symbol,” Ms Hah told news.com.au.

“She’s saying America is about protecting others at risk, the millions who are asking for refuge living in places where there is war and persecution.

“It could just as easily be me but I’m in a place where there isn’t torture.”

Ming Yu Hah protests Donald Trump's immigration policies in Sydney's Martin Place. Picture: William West/AFP

The demonstrators said Australia could help persuade Mr Trump to drop his ‘illegal, inhumane’ ban. Picture: Dean Lewins/AAP

Katie MacKay, 24, demonstrates against Donald Trump's travel ban in Sydney’s Martin Place.

The protest organised by Amnesty International Australia took place at the same time as others in Brisbane and Perth, with more taking place worldwide from Zimbabwe to all across the US.

“The executive order is not only illegal under international humanitarian law, it’s inhumane,” Amnesty Australia national director Claire Mallinsun told news.com.au. “These are the world’s most vulnerable people, mainly women and children. They’re fleeing dictators, civil war and terrorism. The very people we need to help the most, Trump has slammed the door on.

“The first executive order had lots of legal cases brought against it and we expect this will be the same. This undermines the values of what America is all about.”

A federal judge in Honolulu said on Wednesday that Hawaii can move forward with filing what would be the first lawsuit challenging the President’s revised travel ban, which bars new visas for people from Iran, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen and Libya and temporarily shuts down the US refugee program.

The protest came as Hawaii issued the first legal challenge to Mr Trump’s ban.

An emotional woman attends the Sydney protest on Thursday afternoon. Picture: William West

Shek Flanagan at a protest at Melbourne town hall.

US District Judge Derrick Watson granted the state’s request to continue with the case and set a hearing date for March 15 — the day before Mr Trump’s order is due to come into effect.

Strongly Democratic Hawaii had sued to stop the initial ban but that was placed on hold amid legal challenges around the country. A federal judge in Seattle issued a temporary restraining order halting the initial ban after Washington state and Minnesota sued and the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals refused to reinstate the order.

A day after the Trump administration announced its new executive order, lawyers for the state filed their proposed revision in federal court.

The Hawaii attorney general’s office said the ban will harm the state’s Muslim population, tourism, business and foreign students. The US Department of Justice declined to comment on the pending litigation.

Nicole Donnelly protests at the Parliament of South Australia in Adelaide.

Andy Scott at today’s protest in South Brisbane.

While Hawaii is the first to sue to stop the revised ban, the restraining order is still in place and could apply to the new one, too, according to Peter Lavalee, spokesman for the Washington attorney general’s office.

University of Richmond Law School professor Carl Tobias said Hawaii’s complaint seemed in many ways similar to Washington’s successful lawsuit, but it was hard to say whether it would prompt a similar result.

He said it would be harder to show that the new order is intended to discriminate against Muslims because it spells out more of a national security rationale than the old one and allows some travellers from the six nations to be admitted on a case-by-case basis.

— With AP