Trump dropped the original travel order after unfavourable legal rulings and replaced it with a more limited ban which is itself now being challenged in appeals courts on two coasts.
Omar Jadwat, an attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union, who will be arguing the case at the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Virginia on Monday, said the fact that so much time has passed since the ban was issued is proof that there was no pressing national security need for it in the first place.
The Department of Homeland Security "is, and will be, continuously examining ways to enhance the screening and vetting process to shut down terrorist and criminal pathways into the United States," agency spokesman David Lapan said. "Some improvements will be classified, others will be public, but the Department has only just begun ways to enhance the security of our immigration system," he said in an email.
The government argues the text of the order does not mention any specific religion and is needed to protect the country against attacks.COURT HEARING
Then, on March 15, a three-judge panel at the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals will review a decision from a Hawaii judge that halted not just the travel portion of the ban but also the section that barred refugees. The judges – who will sit on a panel in Seattle - have been assigned but their identities have not been made public.
The nation's highest court is more likely to hear a case if the federal appeals courts reach opposite rulings or if the issue is of great national importance, according to legal experts.
Comments
0 comment