Federal judges issued a nationwide temporary restraining order and injunction that blocked the travel ban in March, after separate legal challenges were mounted by the International Refugee Assistance Project (which filed its suit in Maryland) and by the state of Hawaii.
The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals said in a 10-3 ruling that Trump's executive order "speaks with vague words of national security, but in context drips with religious intolerance, animus and discrimination".
On Thursday night, the U.S. Justice Department formally asked the Supreme Court to allow the order to be implemented - it would cover travel and refugee admissions from six majority-Muslim countries, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen. When a major presidential initiative is ruled unconstitutional by a federal appeals court, a review by the Supreme Court nearly always follows.
During the Presidential campaign, Donald Trump called for a "total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States". Remember; lower courts have raised serious doubts about whether this travel ban is constitutional.
"[It] is consistent with rulings from other courts across the nation, and enforces a fundamental principle that protects all of us from government condemnation of our religious beliefs", Jadwat said.
Still, the government argues the courts must defer to the president's national security findings, and blasted the 4th Circuit for imputing discriminatory intent on the basis of the president's campaign statements.
The ban could be reinstated within the next two weeks after Trump's administration filed emergency requests to overturn the previous blocks immediately.
Diaz homers, Cardinals beat Phils to snap losing streak
Wacha struggled in a no-decision against the Cubs on Sunday night, allowing six runs on six hits over 4 1/3 innings of work. I like Wainwright to bounce back here, and even though the Cards' bullpen and offense are pretty bad , I'll take St.
The filing came one week after the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling dealt a fresh blow to Trump's efforts to push the controversial travel ban that has triggered mass protests and confusion at airports. Finally, the government has dragged the issue to the Supreme Court. A ruling from the San Francisco-based 9 Circuit is still pending, but the Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to get involved in the issue now. The suspension was needed, the executive order said, to allow the government to conduct a review of its vetting procedures.
"It's an interesting procedural move, but the fact that it's taken this long may undermine, at least to some extent, the Trump administration's core argument that the entry ban, which has never gone into full effect, is essential to protect our national security", Steve Vladeck, a University of Texas Law school professor and CNN analyst, said. A three-judge panel that heard arguments on May 15 and has yet to rule. The 1st, issued on 27 January and blocked shortly thereafter. Then, perhaps next week, the high court will meet privately to discuss and vote on whether to lift that injunction on the ban.
"We've beat this hateful ban and are ready to do it again", the ACLU said.
The 2nd executive order was meant to overcome the legal issues posed by the original ban, but it was blocked by judges before it could go into effect on 16 March.
The case is now before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Chief Judge Roger Gregory wrote: "We find that the reasonable observer would likely conclude that EO-2's primary objective is to exclude persons from the United States on the basis of their religious beliefs".
Comments