December 4, 2017 Published in Courts & Crime, Top Stories

U.S. Supreme Court Allows Enforcement Of Trump Travel Ban 3.0

Staff Report

The U.S. Supreme Court today stayed preliminary injunctions granted by federal District Courts in Maryland and Hawaii thus allowing enforcement of President Donald Trump’s travel ban 3.0. This means that the Department of Homeland Security can deny close relatives of American citizens entry into the United States from certain Muslim-majority countries.

The two cases are scheduled to be heard in the Fourth and Ninth U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals later this week. The order re the Maryland case, which is identical to the order re the Hawaii case, reads:

“The application for a stay presented to The Chief Justice and by him referred to the Court is granted, and the District Court’s October 17, 2017 order granting a preliminary injunction is stayed pending disposition of the Government’s appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and disposition of the Government’s petition for a writ of certiorari, if such writ is sought. If a writ of certiorari is sought and the Court denies the petition, this order shall terminate automatically. If the Court grants the petition for a writ of certiorari, this order shall terminate when the Court enters its judgment.

“In light of its decision to consider the case on an expedited basis, we expect that the Court of Appeals will render its decision with appropriate dispatch.

“Justice Ginsburg and Justice Sotomayor would deny the application.”

The ACLU released the following statement in response to the Supreme Court’s action:

The Supreme Court granted the Trump administration’s request to temporarily allow the latest Muslim ban to take full effect as the case is litigated. Two federal appeals courts will soon hear separate challenges to the ban. The Ninth Circuit will hear Hawaii’s case on Dec. 6, and the Fourth Circuit will hear the challenge brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and partner organizations on Dec. 8.

Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, had this reaction:

“President Trump’s anti-Muslim prejudice is no secret — he has repeatedly confirmed it, including just last week on Twitter. It's unfortunate that the full ban can move forward for now, but this order does not address the merits of our claims. We continue to stand for freedom, equality, and for those who are unfairly being separated from their loved ones. We will be arguing Friday in the Fourth Circuit that the ban should ultimately be struck down.”

International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump is brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Maryland, National Immigration Law Center, and International Refugee Assistance Project at the Urban Justice Center on behalf of HIAS, IRAP, the Middle East Studies Association, the Yemeni American Merchants Association, the Arab American Association of New York, and numerous individual plaintiffs.

Email this to someoneShare on FacebookShare on Google+Pin on PinterestShare on StumbleUponShare on TumblrTweet about this on Twitter

Comments are closed.