Washington state moves to block Trump's new travel ban in court

Share

The Justice Department filed a 54-page response to that new challenge on Monday, arguing the new travel ban: (1) only applies to foreign nationals with no constitutional right to enter the United States; (2) affords "more than ample process" for someone seeking admission through the waiver system; and (3) does not discriminate on the basis of religion, as "it no longer grants any preference for victims of religious persecution".

Washington state filed an amended complaint Monday morning in an effort to halt the implementation of President Donald Trump's revised travel ban - one of several cases across the nation attacking the constitutionality of the executive order. Maryland, Massachusetts, New York and now California also asked the court for permission to join the lawsuit. Ferguson's action came a day after Hawaii launched its own lawsuit.

The new executive order announces a second suspension of immigrant visa adjudications-and a ban on entry-for nationals of six of the seven majority-Muslim countries targeted in the first ban, that will take effect on March 16, 2017.

One of the issues discussed at the Ninth Circuit was standing, and whether Washington state suffered harm as a result of the ban.

"Rarely in American history has governmental intent to discriminate against a particular faith and its adherents been so plain", the complaint says, alleging the new order will cause "irreparable harm" and asking for an injunction. That means it's the only state with the standing to ask for the same ruling to apply to the revised ban, according to Justin Cox, staff attorney with the National Immigration Law Center. Ferguson's office says the TRO still applies to Trump's new executive order because numerous enjoined provisions remain intact.

The revised ban drops Iraq from the list of countries and makes other changes. They claimed it would affect tourism, among others issues.

The State University of NY and City University of NY are among those claiming harm from the ban. A hearing in the case is scheduled for 3:30 p.m.

Sri Lanka vs Bangladesh, 1st Test, Day 4
It came down to how we batted on the final day and the first session was going to be crucial, but we unfortunately lost wickets. Sri Lanka could not come out to bat for the second time in the match as nearly the entire final session was lost to rain.

Robart issued a restraining order against the initial ban, a ruling that was later upheld by the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Separately, Hawaii has sued over the new ban as well. It also temporarily shuts down the USA refugee program.

February 4: Attorneys for the Trump administration ask the 9th District Court of Appeals to overturn the restraining order.

Trump has repeatedly cited national security concerns as his impetus for the executive order, and has insisted that refugees need to be kept out while the US develops more robust vetting procedures.

He came to the United States in 2014 and was granted asylum a year ago.

"More fundamentally, plaintiffs miss the point", Justice Department lawyers wrote. "And that is precisely why the Order focuses on six countries that Congress and the prior Administration recently determined pose the greatest risk of terrorist infiltration in the future".

A federal judge in Honolulu will hear arguments Wednesday.

Share