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