Federal Court Grants Stay Against Trump's Immigration Order

The ACLU, National Immigration Law Center, International Refugee Assistance Project and other immigrants' rights groups filed a federal lawsuit suit in the Eastern District of New York (Brooklyn)seeking declaratory relief and an emergency stay against Donald Trump's executive immigration order. It also asked the Court to certify the case as a class action.

A hearing was held this afternoon before U.S. District Court Judge Ann M. Donnelly, who granted the motion for stay and issued an order banning the U.S. from deporting anyone nation-wide who lawfully entered the country from Trump's executive order targeting Muslims from 7 countries, and anyone whose refugee application has been approved.

The Court's Order is here.
The Complaint is here. All other documents as of now are under seal. [More...]

Here is the docket entry, via PACER:

Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Ann M Donnelly: Motion Hearing held on 1/28/2017 re Emergency MOTION to Stay Removal filed by HAIDER SAMEER ABDULKHALEQ ALSHAWI and HAMEED KHALID DARWEESH. Case called.

.... For the reasons stated on the record, and as set out in the January 28, 2017 Order, the Motion to Stay is granted, and the respondents are enjoined and restrained from, in any manner or by any means, removing individuals with refugee applications approved by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services as part of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, holders of valid immigrant and non-immigrant visas, and other individuals from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen legally authorized to enter the United States.

The Immigration and Naturalization Act 8 U.S.C. § 1152(a)(1)(A) forbids discrimination in issuance of visas based on a person's race, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.

It is the Court's duty under the Administrative Procedures Act to set aside unconstitutional executive orders.

Representing the immigrants: The American Civil Liberties Union Foundation and its Immigrants’ Rights Project, the National Immigration Law Center, the Jerome N. Frank Legal Services Organization, the International Refugee Assistance Project, and Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP.

Representing Donald Trump: Gisela Westwater (Dpeartment of Justice Immigration attorney (by telephone) and EDNY AUSAs Susan Riley, Elliot M. Schachner, and Scott Dunn, all with the civil division immigration section.

It's time to litigate, not reach across the aisle. Donate to the ACLU, the National Immigration Law Center, and International Refugee Assistance Project.

On Twitter:

< Mexico Cancels President's Trip to White House | Constitutional Rights Apply to Everyone, Including Immigrants >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    For more information on the Jerome N. Frank (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Peter G on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 11:35:29 AM EST
    Legal Services Organization -- the oversight program for student clinics (supervised practice learning opportunities) at Yale Law School -- you can go here.  For some background on Judge Frank (formerly a Yale Law prof of the 1930s "legal realist" school) go here.  I was active in that clinic as a law student 40 years ago! It looks to me like clinic students did most of the overnight work Friday to pull that complaint together, although it was the ACLU immigration project attorneys who argued the case in federal court in Brooklyn last night.  (Similar cases were filed successfully in Eastern Virginia, Boston, and Philadelphia, at least.)

    What (none / 0) (#1)
    by FlJoe on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 08:53:53 AM EST
    a cluster-fk Going it alone and shooting from hip.
    The policy team at the White House developed the executive order on refugees and visas, and largely avoided the traditional interagency process that would have allowed the Justice Department and homeland security agencies to provide operational guidance.....
    Friday night, DHS arrived at the legal interpretation that the executive order restrictions applying to seven countries -- Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Sudan and Yemen -- did not apply to people with lawful permanent residence, generally referred to as green card holders.
    The White House overruled that guidance overnight, according to officials familiar with the rollout. That order came from the President's inner circle, led by Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon. Their decision held that, on a case by case basis, DHS could allow green card holders to enter the US
    Legal advice?
    Before the President issued the order, the White House did not seek the legal guidance of the Office of Legal Counsel, the Justice Department office that interprets the law for the executive branch.
    They don't need no no stinkin legal advice.

    K Drum suspects it's planned by Bannon

    In cases like this, the smart money is usually on incompetence, not malice. But this looks more like deliberate malice to me. Bannon wanted turmoil and condemnation. He wanted this executive order to get as much publicity as possible. He wanted the ACLU involved. He thinks this will be a PR win.
    I am not sure I will go that far(Bannon has always been power mad and has possibly gone around the bend along with his boss).

    In any case it is becoming quite clear who is Trumps chief Wormtongue as he tries to rule by edict.  

    Inside the West Wing, it is almost impossible for some aides to know what is in the executive orders, staffers say. They have been written by Stephen Miller, Trump's senior White House adviser for policy, and Steve Bannon, Trump's chief strategist, according to people familiar with the matter.
    and I find this terrfying
    President Trump reshuffled the National Security Council to include his chief strategist, Stephen Bannon, and limited the roles of the director of national intelligence and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

    NYTimes reporting that Flynn falls (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 07:37:11 AM EST
    From favor. He annoys Trump now. Really annoyed Trump when meeting with the new UK prime minister. Flynn's son also got rid of his Twitter account in mid of all this. So I see signs that Flynn is trying to repair with Trump. Does a subordinate ever repair with Trump? I don't think Flynn can take "a fall from grace" very long. Someone in the military always picked him up though...allowed repair, if he remains fallen I don't know how he'll handle that.

    Palace Intrigue (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by FlJoe on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 09:09:55 AM EST
    who could have predicted? Kushner, who I suspect is one of the top Trump whisperers, remains in the shadows while Bannon is ascendant.

    I am wondering if the bright hot spotlight now focused on Bannon might start to erode Trump's trust in him. If Bannon were to generate too much negative publicity for him he might push him aside also, or at least order him back into the shadows and allow Kushner to be the last person he speaks with.

    Right now, I still keep my money on Bannon as he seems to be the most Machiavellian of the bunch, but I expect him to voluntarily slither back into
    the shadows and to keep his fingerprints off the next disaster.


    Me too (none / 0) (#13)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 12:10:18 PM EST
    One of my Jewish friends immediately wondered out loud this morning, how exactly does Kushner and Bannon work out? Because we have strong reason to suspect that Bannon might harbor something nasty. Something is never going to give there?

    Just really boggles the mind (none / 0) (#14)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 12:15:56 PM EST
    When in my lifetime has a pit of vipers been trying to survive in the White House all together? We've always had a few snakes in every administration, but it isn't a team of rivals, it's a pit of vipers.

    What delicious news. (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by JanaM on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 01:30:10 PM EST
    Flynn - père and fils - are dripping with all sorts of odious issues. The son almost seems like a walking advert for white supremacist thinking.

    Fall out? Hmmm. How about a nice plea in exchange for all he knows about Russian-Trump connections.


    I'm so with you on this :) (none / 0) (#16)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 04:35:02 PM EST
    Well, Bannon (none / 0) (#4)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 12:03:45 PM EST
    is not that bright if he thinks this is a PR win for Trump. I'm sure inside the alt right bubble they are high fiving this all the place. However outside that same bubble people are disgusted and calling it Anti American and unconstitutional. The people detained are coming out and making statements about how much they love this country and the crowds are shouting USA! USA! So much for Trump's vaunted love of the "working class" taxi drivers went on strike.

    Yes, but (none / 0) (#5)
    by KeysDan on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 12:30:01 PM EST
    I would bet that the deplorables love it.  Fear of changing demographics (and loss of their power) has, in their minds, been transmogrified into fear of immigrants (aka terrorists).

    Yeah, that (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 03:45:09 PM EST
    was kind of my point. The deplorables probably love it.

    Yes, it is reported (none / 0) (#2)
    by KeysDan on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 11:00:49 AM EST
    that Bannon personally overruled the Department of Homeland Security lawyers to exclude green card holders (lawful permanent residents).  Bannon seems to be Trump's replacement for dead Roy Cohn. The Bannon/Cohn strategy is to great chaos to achieve goals.  And, just what are the goals?  It seems to me, to be to stoke dissent and provoke attacks so as to pave the way to make America Great Again--defined as a return to Bannon's idea of a "traditionalist" country, that stems or halts multiculturalism, secularism, abortion, a free press, and human rights.  

    im reading (none / 0) (#6)
    by linea on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 02:47:50 PM EST
    restrained from... removing individuals

    prohibits the govt from sending those people currently in u.s. airports back to their countries.  and that this is the only thing the judge ruled on.  im unclear how this ruling squares with this excerpt from the k-1 visa site (which applies generically) that people ate not in the u.s. at a port-of-entry:

    A visa allows a foreign citizen to travel to the U.S. port-of-entry and request permission to enter the United States.

    I had the same legal question, Linea (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Peter G on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 06:25:29 PM EST
    but I am assuming there is a good answer to it, since the government lawyers last night were not arguing that point. They argued (in Brooklyn, at least) that the judge had no authority to rule on the case because the CBP had already strategically chosen to release the named plaintiffs, thus (they imagined) mooting the case. If it were correct, in this case, that a non-citizen arriving at a U.S. boarder check-point, such as an international airport, outside the point where they clear immigration and customs, is not yet "in" the United States (legally speaking), you would have expected that to be the government lawyers' main argument.

    Deputy Attorney General Yates (none / 0) (#18)
    by Peter G on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 07:25:59 PM EST
    who is presently running the Dept of Justice, says that the Executive Order on refugees cannot and will not be defended in court!

    Until (none / 0) (#19)
    by TrevorBolder on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 07:39:54 PM EST
    The Senate Judiciary Committee will vote Tuesday on the nomination of Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions to lead the U.S. Justice Department.

    The committee is set to meet Jan. 31 at 9:30 a.m. ET (8:30 a.m. CT). Sessions' Attorney General nomination is the first item on the agenda


    Perhaps (none / 0) (#20)
    by Peter G on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 07:49:31 PM EST
    We shall see. There is always hope.

    If there are any (none / 0) (#21)
    by TrevorBolder on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 08:02:01 PM EST
    Procedural tactics they can use to further delay the vote, they will use them

    That (none / 0) (#24)
    by FlJoe on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 08:27:46 PM EST
    didn't take long, Trump to Yates "you're fired"(as reported by CNN).

    Yup. Already replaced her as Acting AG (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Peter G on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 08:35:04 PM EST
    with the U.S. Atty for Eastern Dist of Virginia. A notoriously conservative district, especially on "national security" issues. Good on Deputy AG Yates, standing on principle in the tradition of Nixon's DoJ appointees who resigned rather than fire special prosecutor Archibold Cox.

    Grace period (none / 0) (#7)
    by ding7777 on Sun Jan 29, 2017 at 03:02:28 PM EST
    "It seems that a lot of the chaos yesterday could have been avoided, had you at least included some sort of timed grace period," Chuck Todd asked Priebus on NBC News' "Meet the Press." "Why was that not included?" "Well, I don't think you want to have a grace period," Priebus replied. "Then people that want to do bad things to Americans will just move up their travel date two days in order to get into the country before the grace period's over."
    if that's the logic, then why are you now giving a grace period to people who reside in the possible "expanded" countries
    Priebus later said it is possible for President Trump's immigration ban to be expanded to "other countries that have similar problems" in the future.

    wow (none / 0) (#17)
    by FlJoe on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 05:54:57 PM EST
    Acting AG, Sally Yates instructs Justice department not to defend Trumps immigration EO. Constitutional crisis anyone?

    i dont believeso (none / 0) (#22)
    by linea on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 08:03:40 PM EST
    i read that thrump can fire her.

    Talk to Elliot Richardson (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by MKS on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 09:27:05 PM EST
    She has just secured her reputation and probably celebrity status.

    Good on her. Stood up to Trump.


    She has been fired (none / 0) (#23)
    by TrevorBolder on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 08:26:30 PM EST
    Guess who will be AG (none / 0) (#29)
    by MKS on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 09:30:29 PM EST
    in the next Dem Administration?

    is rasmussen reports (none / 0) (#26)
    by linea on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 08:39:07 PM EST
    poling valid?

    because they are reporting that:

    * 57% favor a temporary ban on refugees from the countries in trump's EO with an additional 10% undecided.

     * 56% favor a temporary block on visas prohibiting residents of the countries listed in trump's EO from entering the u.s. with an additional 11% undecided.

    anecdotally, i get the impression this is correct from reading comments on yahoo news and yahoo fashion.  

    You cannot learn anything about what people (none / 0) (#27)
    by Peter G on Mon Jan 30, 2017 at 08:43:30 PM EST
    in general think from reading the comments on any Internet site.

    The Donald is (none / 0) (#30)
    by TrevorBolder on Tue Jan 31, 2017 at 05:39:48 AM EST
    Following through on what he campaigned on.

    The rollout was amateur hour and hopefully whomever decided to do that way will no longer have such responsibility


    Yes, (none / 0) (#31)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jan 31, 2017 at 06:23:37 AM EST
    and that is exactly why this has been a massive disaster. Even the people who voted for him were telling the press they didn't think he was going to do what he said he was going to do. Now they're all mad because he's going to take their insurance away etc. He is governing without the consent of the governed no matter how inept his roll out has been. You cannot be a minority president and push the white nationalist agenda.

    And no, this is not going to be rectified. It is going to be every week as long as he is in office. he's 70 years old. He's not firing any of the people who should be fired. So the stupidity of people like you put us in this disaster and we're going to have to rely on the craven and cowardly people like you to get us out of it.


    please use comments (none / 0) (#40)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Feb 01, 2017 at 12:21:13 AM EST
    to express your views on the topic posted, not your anecdotal impression of comments on Yahoo. This is not an open thread.

    do not hijack this thread (none / 0) (#41)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Feb 01, 2017 at 12:23:01 AM EST
    to a discussion of the Democratic primaries. Such comments are off topic and will be deleted