Supreme Court Urged To Deny Trump Plea To Enforce Full Travel Ban

“The justification for that dramatic relief has only weakened,” Hawaii Attorney General Doug Chin wrote in papers filed Tuesday.

By /

WASHINGTON (AP) — Challengers to the Trump administration’s latest travel ban on visitors from six mostly Muslim countries are urging the Supreme Court to reject the administration’s plea to be allowed to fully enforce the ban.

Federal courts have prevented President Donald Trump’s administration from banning people from Chad, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen who can claim a “bona fide” relationship with someone in the United States. Courts have said grandparents, cousins and other relatives count among the close relationships that are required.

Last week, the administration said blocking the full ban was causing “irreparable harm” because the policy is based on legitimate national security and foreign policy concerns.

Supreme Court Building Washington DC Equal Justice Under Law. 9 june 2016
U.S. Supreme Court justices are considering a challenge to the Trump travel ban raised by several states, including Hawaii. Cory Lum/Civil Beat

But the challengers said in court papers filed Tuesday that the Supreme Court rejected a similar request from the administration last summer involving an earlier version of the travel ban that was making its way through the courts.

Hawaii Attorney General Douglas Chin told the court that “the justification for that dramatic relief has only weakened” because the latest travel ban, unlike its two predecessors, is permanent.

In lawsuits filed in Hawaii and Maryland, federal courts said the updated travel ban that Trump announced in September violated federal immigration law. The travel policy also applies to travelers from North Korea and to some Venezuelan government officials and their families, but the lawsuits did not challenge those restrictions.

Arguments are scheduled for Dec. 6 before a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Seattle. The Maryland case is due to be argued before the full 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Dec. 8 in Richmond, Virginia.

16 years ago, Civil Beat did not exist.

Civil Beat exists today because thousands of readers like you read, shared and donated to keep our stories free and accessible to all. Now we need your support to continue this critical work.

Give now and support our spring campaign to raise $100,000 from 250+ donors by May 15. Mahalo for making this work possible!

Donate

About the Author