Immigration Lawyer Blog
On January 27, 2017, President Trump signed an executive order banning individuals from seven predominantly Muslim countries (Sudan, Somalia, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, and Syria) from entering the United States. On February 3, 2017, a federal judge in Washington issued a temporary restraining banning the Federal Government from enforcing the order. The temporary restraining order was later upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on February 9, 2017.
Based on the Ninth Circuit’s ruling, President Trump withdrew the executive order, and signed a new executive order on March 6, 2017. Among other things, the new order bans foreign nationals from six of the original countries listed in the first order (Iraq is excluded), from entering the United States if they do not currently have a valid visa to enter the United States. In addition, unlike the first order, which had a blanket ban against travel from citizens of those countries, citizens of the six affected countries may travel to the United States if they: (1) are U.S. lawful permanent residents; (2) are traveling on a diplomatic visa; or (3) are traveling after already being granted asylum in the United States, withholding of removal, or protection under the Convention Against Torture.
On March 8, 2017, the State of Hawaii, along with a United States citizen of Egyptian descent, filed a motion with the U.S. District Court in Hawaii, seeking a temporary restraining order against enforcement of the travel ban. In their filing to the Court, Plaintiffs claimed that the travel ban discriminated against Muslims, in violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.