On Monday, June 26, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Trump v. International Refugee Assistance Project and stay applications were granted in part. The case is based on the January 21 Executive Order No. 13780, “Protecting the nation from foreign terrorist entry into the United States.” The order suspended immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the country by citizens of seven majority Muslim countries: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days. It also suspended refugee admission into the United States for 120 days, and barred entry of Syrian refugees until further notice. The stated order’s purpose was to “ensure that those admitted to this country do not bear hostile attitudes toward it and its founding principles.”
The Washington State Attorney General filed a lawsuit against the order in District Court citing harm to Seattle residents. Judge James Robart in the Western District of Washington issued a restraining order on February 3 halting President Trump’s executive order nationwide. The Department of Justice appealed the restraining order to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which rejected the Justice Department’s appeal for an emergency stay.
Three International & National Security Law experts joined us for a great discussion on what the Supreme Court’s actions mean for the current application of the EO and a preview of the case before the Court.
- Prof. Josh Blackman, Associate Professor of Law, South Texas College of Law, Houston
- David B. Rivkin Jr., Partner, Baker & Hostetler LLP
- Prof. Ilya Somin, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University