Travel ban rebuff tests presidency
As Trump lashes out at judge’s sweeping order, Justice Dept. plans to appeal.
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — President Trump grappled Saturday with the first major setback to his young administration, appearing to question the constitutional checks on his power after a judge’s order reopened the flow of travelers from seven mostly Muslim nations covered by his controversial travel ban.
The Department of Homeland Security said Saturday that it had suspended “any and all actions” related to Trump’s executive action a day after federal Judge James L. Robart issued a temporary restraining order, effective nationwide, in response to a lawsuit filed by the states of Washington and Minnesota. The suit argued that the president’s moves had amounted to religious discrimination against Muslims in violation of the U.S. Constitution.
On Saturday night, the Justice Department said it would appeal the order by Robart, an appointee of President George W. Bush who is now senior judge of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. The case heads next to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in California and perhaps the Supreme Court to decide whether Robart’s tempo-
rary restraining order should remain in effect. Several other federal courts have also issued emergency stays against portions of the executive order as dozens of lawsuits proceed against it.
In response to Robart’s restraining order, the State Department, which had “provisionally revoked” 60,000 visas since the president signed his Jan. 27 order, said Saturday that it had started reaccepting those visas from people in the countries affected.
Some travelers in those countries already were being allowed to board planes headed to the U.S., as foreign airlines started telling passengers Saturday that the immigration ban had been lifted. Many rushed to catch flights, worried that the window to travel might soon be closed again by the courts.
At Logan International Airport in Boston, crowds had gathered at the international arrivals area to welcome those from the restricted countries. They held signs saying, “Refugees are welcome in the U.S.A.” and “Christians build bridges, not walls.”
“We had more than 40 mostly Iranian nationals land and clear customs today,” said Kerry Doyle, an attorney with the American Immigration Lawyers Assn. who was posted at the airport. “We’ve had Tunisians and Syrians too, all flying from Germany on Lufthansa.”
When Robart issued the national order from Seattle, many visa holders had already changed their plans to fly to Massachusetts even if it wasn’t their final destination because a Boston federal judge had earlier issued a temporary order against Trump’s ban that was being applied locally.
“It’s a whole different feeling at the airport than last week,” Doyle said.
Trump’s executive order, which also includes a 120day ban on most refugee admissions and an indefinite ban for Syrian refugees, was one of several the president has signed since taking office as part of a White House strategy designed to begin implementing his governing vision with maximum impact.
But the torrid pace of action sparked an equally fierce public response that continued Saturday, including protests in Los Angeles and other cities. One march came near the gates of the Palm Beach, Fla., estate branded as the “Winter White House” where Trump was spending the third weekend of his presidency.
Trump and his advisors had largely downplayed the confusion his order sparked and contended that it was on solid legal ground, even though on Monday he dismissed the acting attorney general who had told Justice Department attorneys to cease defending it in court.
Trump began Saturday with a series of Twitter attacks against Robart in which he derided the “socalled judge” for a “ridiculous” opinion.
“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.?” he asked in a later tweet.
Activists and state officials opposed to Trump’s order celebrated. “The law is a powerful thing. It has the ability to hold everyone accountable to it, and that includes the president of the United States,” Washington state Atty. Gen. Bob Ferguson said at a news conference after the decision.
Democrats seized on Trump’s criticism of Robart as an opening in the emerging Senate confirmation battle over the president’s Supreme Court nominee.
Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer of New York said Trump’s attack “shows a disdain for an independent judiciary that doesn’t always bend to his wishes.”
With every outburst, Schumer said, Trump just “raises the bar even higher” for federal Judge Neil M. Gorsuch’s nomination.
Democrats were quick to remind that this was not Trump’s first time singling out a judge, comparing it to his attacks during the campaign on U.S.-born Judge Gonzalo Curiel of San Diego, who Trump said could not be impartial in a case involving Trump University because of his Mexican heritage.
“Now he is attempting to bully and disparage yet another federal judge — this one appointed by a Republican president and confirmed by a Republican Senate — for having the audacity to do his job and apply the rule of the law,” said Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. “The president’s hostility toward the rule of law is not just embarrassing, it is dangerous.”
Trump’s GOP allies in Congress remained largely silent about the court’s stay, and party leaders declined to respond to the president’s attacks on Robart.
Congressional leaders have been furious after being cut out of the White House’s planning and execution of the travel ban, and they continued Saturday scrambling to repair the chaotic rollout. Many lawmakers have been fielding frantic requests from constituents calling their offices and pleading for help for family members, students and others ensnared in the travel ban.
Some of the confusion surrounding Trump’s early moves has been attributed to a tight circle of decisionmaking in the White House, centered on senior policy advisor Stephen Miller and chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon.
But James Carafano, who oversaw national security planning during Trump’s transition, described a more deliberate approach that flowed from the president’s view of a security threat.
“People are kind of in shock and awe of the phenomenon, so they’re running around coming up for explanations for it,” said Carafano, a national security and foreign policy analyst for the conservative Heritage Foundation. “The notion that somehow they could have waited and done more vetting and talked to more people — and what? It would have been less controversial? Give me a break.
“They understood there was going to be some friction, but those things could be worked through,” he said.
After civil rights groups filed lawsuits on behalf of those who had green cards designating them as permanent legal residents, the administration clarified that green card holders would be exempt from the travel ban. Government officials also reversed a position last week and said that dual citizens who held citizenship from one nation that was not on the restricted list would be exempt, even if they also were citizens of a country on the list.