Judges probe travel ban’s close-kin rule

SEATTLE — A government lawyer faced questions Monday from three federal appeals court judges over who should be allowed into the U.S. under President Donald Trump’s travel ban.

In June, the U.S. Supreme Court said the president’s 90-day ban on visitors from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen can be enforced pending arguments scheduled for October, as long as those visitors lack a “bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States,” such as a close family relationship.

The government interpreted such relations as including immediate family members and in-laws, but it excluded grandparents, cousins, aunts and uncles. A judge in Hawaii overruled that interpretation, expanding the definition of who can enter. The administration appealed that order to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which heard arguments in Seattle on Monday.

Judge Ronald Gould asked “from what universe” the government got the idea that grandparents don’t constitute a close family relationship. Judge Richard Paez questioned why a parent-in-law would be allowed in, but not a grandparent.

Justice Department lawyer Hashim Mooppan said parentsin-law are only one step removed from the family unit, while a grandparent or grandchild is more than one step removed. He said the government wasn’t disputing that people could have a profound connection to their grandparents, but said the administration was relying on a standard set by Congress.