REFUGEE RULING APPEAL SOUGHT
The Justice Department is preparing to appeal a Seattle judge’s ruling that temporarily blocked President Trump’s executive order on refugees, a move that capped off a tumultuous day that saw visa holders from seven restricted countries rushing to board U.S.-bound flights.
Hours after Trump questioned the legitimacy of U.S. District Court Judge James Robart, an appointee of President George W. Bush whom he referred to as a “so-called judge,” whose “ridiculous” ruling “will be overturned,” the Justice Department said it will ask a federal appeals court to set aside his order that temporarily halted a Trump administration executive order that suspended America’s refugee program and ceased immigration to the U.S. from seven Muslim-majority countries.
“What is our country coming to when a judge can halt a Homeland Security travel ban and anyone, even with bad intentions, can come into U.S.?” Trump tweeted yesterday as the Justice Department readied its legal challenge, adding, “Because the ban was lifted by a judge, many very bad and dangerous people may be pouring into our country. A terrible decision.”
Trump also questioned why the success of government lawyers in Boston, who quashed a restraining order against the travel ban on Friday, wasn’t being considered.
“Why aren’t the lawyers looking at and using the Federal Court decision in Boston, which is at conflict with ridiculous lift ban decision?” Trump tweeted.
While Robart’s order was in place, advocacy groups urged visa holders overseas to take advantage of the window and come to the U.S. if possible.
Rula Aoun, director of the Arab American Civil Rights League in Dearborn, Mich., said her group is telling people to hurry.
“We’re ... instructing people who can travel immediately to the United States to basically go ahead and do that before anything further happens,” Aoun said.
Robart’s order came hours after a federal judge in Boston
declined to extend a temporary order against the ban because the case was unlikely to succeed, a decision that will likely influence the appeals process, former U.S. Attorney Donald Stern told the Herald.
“If you’re appealing to the Ninth Circuit from the state of Washington effort, you’re going to cite and refer to Judge (Nathaniel) Gorton’s decision, saying, ‘Look, Ninth Circuit judges, at least one other judge has looked at this and come to another conclusion,’ ” Stern said.
Stern expects the cases in Boston and Seattle to move quickly to their respective appeals courts — with the U.S. Supreme Court standing by if the two circuits disagree. Boston College Law assistant professor Kari Hong, who has argued immigration cases in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and clerked for its current Chief Justice Sidney Thomas, said lawyers in Boston are likely to press arguments from universities because that was a convincing point in the Seattle case.
“The plaintiffs get to control the case, so I think what will happen is the Boston case will include universities and hospitals,” Hong said. “I suspect, ultimately, which plaintiffs are included will make a difference. There are a lot of competing stories out there, but how they frame it will make a difference.”