MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, September 19th 2018 - 15:01 UTC

Federal Judge blocks Trump's immigration ban; White House will appeal

Saturday, February 4th 2017 - 07:11 UTC
Full article 13 comments
 Judge James Robart explicitly made his ruling apply across the country, while other judges facing similar cases have so far issued orders concerning specific individuals Judge James Robart explicitly made his ruling apply across the country, while other judges facing similar cases have so far issued orders concerning specific individuals
The judge ruled that states have legal standing to sue, which could help Democratic attorneys general take on Trump in court on issues beyond immigration. The judge ruled that states have legal standing to sue, which could help Democratic attorneys general take on Trump in court on issues beyond immigration.

Seattle federal judge on Friday put a block on U.S. President Donald Trump's week-old executive order that had temporarily barred refugees and nationals from seven countries from entering the United States. The judge's temporary restraining order represents a major setback for Trump's action, though the White House said late Friday that it believed the ban to be “lawful and appropriate” and that the U.S. Department of Justice would file an emergency appeal.

 Still, just hours after the ruling, U.S. Customs and Border Protection told airlines they could board travelers who had been affected by the ban.

Trump's Jan. 27 order caused chaos at airports across the United States as some citizens from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen were denied entry. Virtually all refugees were also barred, upending the lives of thousands of people who had spent years seeking asylum in the U.S.

The State Department said Friday that almost 60,000 visas were suspended in the wake of Trump's order; it was not clear Friday night whether that suspension was automatically revoked or what travelers with such visas might confront at U.S. airports.

While a number of lawsuits have been filed over Trump's action, the Washington state lawsuit was the first to test the broad constitutionality of the executive order. Judge James Robart, a George W. Bush appointee, explicitly made his ruling apply across the country, while other judges facing similar cases have so far issued orders concerning only specific individuals.

The challenge in Seattle was brought by the state of Washington and later joined by the state of Minnesota. The judge ruled that the states have legal standing to sue, which could help Democratic attorneys general take on Trump in court on issues beyond immigration.

Washington's case was based on claims that the state had suffered harm from the travel ban, for example students and faculty at state-funded universities being stranded overseas. Amazon.com and Expedia, both based in Washington state, had supported the lawsuit, asserting that the travel restrictions harmed their businesses.

Tech companies, which rely on talent from around the world, have been increasingly outspoken in their opposition to the Trump administration's anti-immigrant policies.

Judge Robart probed a Justice Department lawyer on what he called the ”litany of harms” suffered by Washington state’s universities, and also questioned the administration's use of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States as a justification for the ban.

Robart said no attacks had been carried out on U.S. soil by individuals from the seven countries affected by the travel ban since that assault. For Trump’s order to be constitutional, Robart said, it had to be “based in fact, as opposed to fiction.”

The White House said it would file an appeal as soon as possible. “At the earliest possible time, the Department of Justice intends to file an emergency stay of this outrageous order and defend the executive order of the president, which we believe is lawful and appropriate,” the White House said in a statement.

Categories: Politics, United States.

Top Comments

Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Captain Poppy

    Actually I was thinking about myocardio infarction as well.

    Elaine, while I have never been a proponent of unabated immigration, I've never been for banning it as well. I've always been in favor for controlled immigration and supported refugees. One only needs to see a child pawing and crying over her dead parents a number of times to know accepting refugees from war torn countries is needed.

    This RO will be appealed and likely not hold in it's entirety. A visa is not a right to a foreign national, so it is likely that denying future visa's will remain, but those already approved will not be allowed to be revoked without cause other than the whimes of Steve Bannon. The order was sophomorically drafted and ignorantly executed.

    Now onto new Trump order.......dumping sludge into rivers.....allowed, Stock brokers can trade clients accounts with maximizing commissions in mind....AKA,,,churning, oil companies payments to government officials being reported overturned.....bribes.........ethic rules....out the window....where does it end?

    I find the strangest of the GOP supporting Devos for education is that when the rules change funding and the USA starts supporting and paying for the rich to go the private schools and funding in public schools decreases, it will hurt those redneck states the most. For me.....no big deal, I live in Massachusetts....Deerfield Acadamy, Smith Academy, Phillips Academy, Groton, Milton....the list goes on. But what wealthy people send their kids to school in Arkansas, Butte Montana, Miss. et al? I would think those people can ill afford to have their educated reduced even further.

    Feb 04th, 2017 - 01:40 pm +3
  • Captain Poppy

    Yes....crazy. I have to say that when Trump issued that order, I good good as an American that they mobilized so quickly in an attempt to repel that order. I've never seen a President have so many lawsuits in as little as two weeks in office. It's actually almost exhausting watching the news every day here because every day has a major issue. Even something as simple as a statement that has to be pulled back, fixed and re-issued. They are so unprofessional and unprepared for this. That Jeffrey Lord on CNN has to be to most blind sheep of them all.

    Feb 04th, 2017 - 06:07 pm +3
  • DemonTree

    @EB
    I know he lost the popular vote, but he won IIRC three states by small margins. So if just a few people living there change their minds, or people who didn't vote last time do get out and vote next time, he could lose the next election.

    However, I am kind of afraid he will have managed to start a war by then, or done something equally drastic to make himself more popular.

    I think you are right about him handing power to his cronies. How far the Republican government will let him get away with it, I don't know.

    @CP
    I agree with Elaine, the protests and push-back from Americans does give us hope.

    Feb 04th, 2017 - 07:38 pm +3
Read all comments

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!