The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Virginia heard arguments on the injunction against Trump’s revised Executive Order banning Visas to citizens from 7 predominately Muslim countries. The appeal stems from a ruling handed down in March by a federal judge in Maryland who blocked the enforcement of a key portion of President Trump’s revised Executive Order. The International Refugee Assistance Project brought the claim and the Justice Department has appealed.
Yesterday, oral argument began with a judge requiring Acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall to explain why two provisions in the Immigration and Nationality Act do not conflict.
“Wall was asked why one provision in the law, which prevents discrimination based on nationality in the issuance of visas, doesn’t limit another, which gives the president authority to block certain immigrants from entering the country. That difference, between issuing a visa and barring entry, is key to this case — if the latter provision is not blocked by the first, then the president’s executive order is in violation of the law.”
Judge Barbara Keenan questioned the revised Executive Order for its failure to support that allowing foreign nationals into the country would be “detrimental” to the national interest. Wall replied that the Trump wanted time to review vetting procedures. Judge Keenan responded, “He has to find that they would be detrimental to the interest of the U.S.” Read the rest of this entry
Trump’s Executive Order – 9th Circuit Court of Appeals To Hear Argument On Temporary Injunction – Live Streamed
Because of public interest, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals plans to live stream oral argument on the temporary injunction order entered by the Washington federal court. It can be accessed at this link.
Oral argument begins at 3 p.m. P.T. That’s 5 p.m. CST and 6 p.m. on the East Coast. Some sources are reporting that the live stream will be audio only because the attorneys are appearing by phone.
The 9th Circuit has also opened a website for documents filed in and proceedings held in the State of Washington and State of Minnesota v. Trump.
It began on January 27, 2017 when Trump signed an Executive Order barring citizens from 7 predominately Muslim countries from entering the United States for 90 days; refugees for 120 days, and indefinitely halts refugees from Syria.
The ACLU filed a petition that resulted in a temporary injunction of Trump’s Executive Order that the court granted. Petitions were filed in other federal circuits as well.
U.S. District Judge Nathaniel Gorton in Boston granted a temporary injunction, but refused to extend it. It was filed by the ACLU on behalf of 2 University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth professors who returned from an academic conference and were retained at Logan Airport. The professors are Iranian Muslims and lawful permanent U.S. residents. They were eventually allowed to re-enter.
It is the order entered by U.S. District Judge James Robart of the US District Court for the Western District of Washington that sprung the Trump administration into action. That order places a temporary injunction on Trump’s Executive Order nationwide. Attorneys for the DOJ filed a notice of appeal and motion to stay the temporary injunction. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals denied the stay. It’s the appeal to the temporary order that is scheduled for hearing today.
Follow-up reports will be posted in the comment section.