Seattle judge says Trump travel ban case should continue during appeals

A Justice Department spokesman did not immediately return an email seeking comment Monday night.

Jen Smyers of Church World Service spoke for many people of faith working on behalf of refugees when she called January 27 “a shameful day” in the history of the United States.

Trump’s order temporarily barred people from seven Muslim-majority countries from traveling to the United States for 90 days, as well as all refugees for 120 days – except those from Syria, who were banned indefinitely. None of this had to happen and it could still be remedied if wiser heads prevail.

In the American political system, the use of the executive order as a means to implement policy may be said to inhabit a political gray area.

“In the end, the powers of the president of the United States will be reaffirmed, and the whole world will see clearly and unmistakably.that this country will protect its borders”. “Eastern Standard Time on Friday, January 27,2017, was lawfully admitted for permanent residency in the United States, held an immigrant visa that would entitle the bearer to be lawfully admitted for permanent residency upon admission to the United States, held a valid student visa (or accompanying family or spousal visa), or held a valid work visa (or accompanying family or spousal visa)”.

“For legal, Constitutional and political reasons, [Trump] should tear up the executive order of the 29th of January”, Napolitano said, adding that such a move would nullify the case in Seattle, as well as 48 other lawsuits filed in response to the order.

Michelle Bennett, a Justice Department lawyer, told Robart there was no basis for speeding up the trial, arguing states are not being harmed because there’s a temporary injunction in place.

Separately on Monday, U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema granted a preliminary injunction barring implementation of the president’s order against anyone who lives, works or attends school in Virginia.

Herring, a Democrat, called Trump’s travel ban “unlawful, unconstitutional and un-American”. Some, with the help of zealous American lawyers, chose to take it to the courts to challenge Trump’s executive order.

And even if his future executive orders were to be more or less upheld by the Supreme Court, Trump will of course not lose sight of the fact that the conservative justices, though appointed to essentially lifetime terms, will only live a finite number of years. And it is wrong. The panel unanimously rejected the administration’s claim of presidential authority in the matter. It was asking the court to just get out of the way. According to description from Bloomberg, the order “bars Syrian refugees from entering the USA indefinitely, and all other refugees – people fleeing their homelands claiming persecution or fear of violence – for 120 days”.

And his administration had hinted it may unveil new measures on immigration in the wake of its court defeats.

A senior adviser to the president continued Donald Trump’s attacks on the judiciary over his suspended travel ban while declining to indicate what legal strategy the administration will pursue to enforce the president’s executive order.

“I don’t have a scintilla of evidence that counters this argument”, Brinkema said, directing her remarks to government lawyers. He could make clear that it no longer applies to green-card holders – who probably have the strongest case to sue in US courts – or he could craft an order that applies only to people who have not yet applied for visas. Meanwhile, dozens of other cases have been filed throughout the country challenging the travel ban under the same and/or different theories raised in the Seattle case. As such, the rulings prefigure the likely result of a final decision.

The Department of Justice is working on a new executive order to reinstate the president’s immigration ban.

For now, the executive order and the challenges to it are still wending their way through the nation’s courts. Sooner or later, such recourse will be the only course available to the Trump administration.

It is unlikely in the short term that these Secretaries will take the advice of the tech sector over the President until the courts complete a constitutional analysis of the pending cases.