The state of Hawaii is asking a judge to suspend Trump’s latest travel ban,

State also asking judge to suspend executive order.

A federal judge in Hawaii will hear arguments on whether to block President Donald Trump’s revised executive order barring the issuance of new visas to citizens of six Muslim-majority countries the day before the measure is set to take effect.

U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson scheduled a hearing for March 15. The state of Hawaii is also asking Watson to immediately suspend the executive order.

Its 38-page complaint asserts that the new executive order — much like the one it replaced after it was blocked in federal courts — violates the establishment clause of the First Amendment because it is essentially a ban on Muslims. The state also contends that the order hinders Hawaii businesses and universities in their efforts to recruit top talent and damages the financial interests of the state, which considers tourism its top industry.

“President Trump’s new Executive Order is antithetical to Hawaii’s State identity and spirit,” lawyers for the state wrote. “For many in Hawaii, including State officials, the Executive Order conjures up the memory of the Chinese Exclusion Acts and the imposition of martial law and Japanese internment after the bombing of Pearl Harbor.”

Trump’s revised travel ban is substantially changed from its original version, and those who sue over it will probably have a harder time getting it immediately frozen by the courts. They will have to convince judges that there is an urgent need to do so and that, in the long term, the order runs afoul of the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious freedom.

The new order reduces the list of affected countries from seven to six — removing Iraq while keeping Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, Yemen and Syria. It explicitly exempts legal permanent residents and current visa holders, blocking only the issuance of new visas for citizens of the affected countries for 90 days.

It also spells out a lengthy list of people who may be eligible for exceptions, including those previously admitted to the United States for “a continuous period of work, study, or other long-term activity,” those with “significant business or professional obligations” and those seeking to visit or live with relatives.

The new order keeps intact a 120-day suspension of the U.S. refugee resettlement program, and it declares that the United States will not accept more than 50,000 refugees in fiscal 2017, down from the 110,000 cap set by the Obama administration. It will take effect March 16 unless a court intervenes.

In its lawsuit, Hawaii argues that foreign residents and travelers contribute substantially to the functioning of the state, and blocking even the issuance of new visas would have a major impact. State lawyers wrote that Hawaii is home to 12,000 foreign students, and at least 27 graduate students are from the seven countries affected by the original ban.

In 2016, lawyers for the state wrote, Hawaii’s foreign students contributed more than $400 million to Hawaii’s economy with tuition and fees, living expenses and other activities. The lawyers also said tourism is a driver of Hawaii’s economy, and that 8.7 million visitors accounted for $15 billion in spending in 2015.

As others did in challenges to the first travel ban, Hawaii points to campaign trail comments by Trump indicating that he wanted to impose a blanket ban on Muslims as evidence that the order violates the clause of the First Amendment that states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

Justice Department lawyers have asserted that a short-term freeze is especially unnecessary, because the new ban only applies to the issuance of new visas, a process that can take months.