EXIT

News > Immigration In The United States

Trump travel ban blocked – what’s next?

Posted on Mar 30 2017

UPDATED 3/30/17 – originally published 3/15/17: U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson granted a temporary restraining order (TRO) on March 15, halting the parts of the executive order barring residents of six countries from entering the United States and suspending refugee admissions. That means these parts of the executive order may not be implemented anywhere in the country until there is a full hearing on the motion for a preliminary injunction. The Hawaii court order was quickly followed by a Maryland order, granting a preliminary injunction barring enforcement of the travel ban.

On March 29, Judge Watson heard arguments from both sides and then extended the TRO, making it a preliminary injunction that will prevent enforcement of the travel ban and refugee ban parts of the executive order while the case proceeds through full federal court hearings.

Vox reported on the March 29 ruling:

“But the judge’s decision came in yet another strongly worded ruling smacking around the Trump administration for revamping the legal language of the executive order to scrub away any implication of Islamophobic animus while still making political statements to winkingly acknowledge their real goal wasn’t going to change. “The Court will not crawl into a corner, pull the shutters closed, and pretend it has not seen what it has,” Judge Watson declared.”

Judge Watson’s original March 15 ruling was based on the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. In part of the 43-page opinion, he wrote:

“…. a reasonable, objective observer—enlightened by the specific historical context, contemporaneous public statements, and specific sequence of events leading to the issuance—would conclude that the Executive Order was issued with a purpose to disfavor a particular religion, in spite of its stated, religiously-neutral purpose…” [pp. 28-29]

In order to grant the temporary restraining order, Judge Watson found that:

  1. There is a likelihood that the plaintiffs – the State of Hawaii and Dr. Elshikh – will succeed on the merits;
  2. If the temporary restraining order is not granted, the plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm, and;
  3. Equity and public interest weigh in favor of granting emergency relief.

The president chose not to appeal Watson’s TRO, as he did (unsuccessfully) when U.S. District Judge James Robart blocked the first executive order for travel and refugee bans. The Ninth Circuit upheld Judge Robart’s suspension of the previous executive order. Hawaii, like Washington, is in the Ninth Circuit, so any appeal of Judge Watson’s order would have gone to the Ninth Circuit.

With each new ruling, the Trump administration’s ability to implement a travel ban narrows. Vox summarizes:

“At this point, the only way the Trump administration is going to get the travel ban into effect is to get the Supreme Court to rule in its favor. And the only question is whether it’s going to do it with different courts of appeals having ruled on opposite sides — with the Fourth Circuit siding with the president, and the Ninth Circuit with the challengers — or whether it’s going to get a case where the Trump administration has been knocked around by judges from, literally, coast to coast.”

For more information:

Read the entire March 15 opinion here (PDF). If that link does not work, scroll to the bottom of this page to read it as a Scribd document.

Read the entire March 29 opinion here.