March 15, 2017 (San Diego) Judge Derrick K, Watson of Hawaii has granted a temporary restraining order on the new executive order that limited immigration from 6 Muslim countries.
The order reads as follows:
As discussed above, Plaintiffs have shown a strong likelihood of succeeding on their claim that the Executive Order violates First Amendment rights under the Constitution. “[I]t is always in the public interest to prevent the violation of a party’s constitutional rights.” Melendres, 695 F.3d at 1002 (emphasis added) (citing Elrod, 427 U.S. at 373); Gordon v. Holder, 721 F.3d 638, 653 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (“[E]nforcement of an unconstitutional law is always contrary to the public interest.” (citing Lamprecht v. FCC, 958 F.2d 382, 390 (D.C. Cir. 1992); G & V Lounge v. Mich. Liquor Control Comm’n, 23 F.3d 1071, 1079 (6th Cir. 1994).
When considered alongside the constitutional injuries and harms discussed above, and the questionable evidence supporting the Government’s national security motivations, the balance of equities and public interests justify granting the Plaintiffs’ TRO. See Aziz, 2017 WL 580855, at * 10. Nationwide relief is appropriate in light of the likelihood of success on the Establishment Clause claim.
This was a first amendment challenge and on freedom of religion. The judge took into account statements made during the campaign.
This is the second executive order issued by the White House and the first was enjoined nationally by Judge James Robart. It was sustained by the 9th circuit.
The first executive order triggered protests nationwide, including San Diego Lindberg Field. While the protests were not as large the second time around, the TRO is issued on similar grounds, and that is freedom of religion.
The president has pledged in Tenessee speech to take this case all the way to the United States Supreme Court. (This is an update on a developing story.)
And this is Stenny Hoyer’s Democratic Whip statement on this.
WASHINGTON, DC – House Democratic Whip Steny H. Hoyer (MD) released the following statement this evening in response to a nationwide ruling halting President Trump’s second Muslim Ban before it goes into effect:
“I’m not at all surprised that a federal judge has blocked the Trump Administration’s revised travel ban from taking effect, mirroring the rulings that blocked the previous ban. The President and his advisors have been clear all along that the point of instituting such a travel ban is to keep Muslims from entering our country – a clear violation of the First Amendment. At the same time, such a ban is dangerous, making Americans less safe by providing a potent recruiting tool for terror groups like ISIS, aiding in their radicalization efforts. I will continue to monitor developments closely and support efforts to prevent a travel ban that harms our national security from taking effect.”