The Trump administration continues to implement policy changes that are slowing and restricting legal immigration. Learn more about these policy changes by reading AILA’s Deconstructing the Invisible Wall report and share on social mediawith your networks.
Often times, litigation is the bulwark against these changes, as evident in the “Travel Ban 3.0” litigation, which if allowed to stand would “not only preclude over 150 million people, overwhelmingly Muslim, from coming to the United States, but it will also consolidate “breathtakingly vast” power in the executive branch.” Fearless lawyering isn’t just limited to litigating major cases like the travel ban, so don’t miss AILA’s Annual Conference in San Francisco on June 13-16, to learn new skills and polish existing tools to become the fearless lawyer needed in today’s immigration environment.
The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments tomorrow, Wednesday, April 25, 2018, over the third version of the Trump administration’s travel ban, which restricts travel from five predominantly Muslim countries (Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen) as well as North Korea and Venezuela. President Trump lifted travel restrictions on Chad, effective April 13, 2018.
Get Involved on Social Media
- Where does Travel Ban 3.0 stand going into the #SCOTUS arguments? Read @PennStateLaw’s Center for Immigrants’ Rights preview to find out: http://ow.ly/aKbO30jET8O #NoMuslimBanEver
- As #SCOTUS hears oral arguments on the Travel Ban 3.0 it’s important to note the ban remains in full effect and waivers are vanishingly rare http://ow.ly/zkkG30jEPNx #AILAStandsWithImmigrants
- The Travel Ban 3.0 is another example of how the Trump administration is building an #InvisibleWall to slow legal #immigration. @AILANational report shows how: http://ow.ly/yNWZ30j43SR #AILAStandsWithImmigrants #NoMuslimBanEver
- Congress must hold federal agencies accountable for unnecessarily “extreme” vetting processes that slow legal #immigration, including the #TravelBan. Take Action: http://www.aila.org/takeaction#/42#AILAStandsWithImmigrants
The first two versions of the travel ban were struck down by lower courts. The Supreme Court allowed the third version to take full effect while legal challenges continue and will now hear arguments in Trump v. Hawaii, over whether the travel ban aims to restrict immigration based on religion. The ban’s application to North Korea and Venezuela is not being challenged.
The U.S. Supreme Court asked both parties to address four questions:
- Is the respondent’s challenge to Travel Ban 3.0 justiciable?
- Is Travel Ban 3.0 a lawful exercise of the President’s authority to suspend entry of aliens abroad?
- Is a nationwide injunction barring enforcement of Travel Ban 3.0 impermissibly overbroad?
- Does Travel Ban 3.0 violate the U.S. Constitution’s Establishment Clause?
Check out this document from Penn State Law’s Center for Immigrants’ Rights for a history of the Travel Ban 3.0 litigation and a preview of the oral arguments.
Follow Greg Chen, Director of Government Relations, and #NoMuslimBanEver on Twitter for updates from the oral arguments and watch AILA.org for additional resources in response to the oral arguments.