CA4 Affirms District Court's Preliminary Injunction Against Travel Ban

CA4 Affirms District Court’s Preliminary Injunction Against Travel Ban

CA4 Affirms District Court’s Preliminary Injunction Against Travel Ban

February 15, 2018

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the 10/17/17 preliminary injunction granted by the district court. The court stayed its decision in light of the Supreme Court’s 12/4/17 order staying the injunction. (IRAP v. Trump, 2/15/18)


December 4, 2017

The Supreme Court issued an order staying the district court’s 10/17/17 preliminary injunction, pending disposition of the government’s appeal in the Fourth Circuit and disposition of the government’s petition for a writ of certiorari, if one is sought. The court also issued a similar order in Trump v. Hawaii, meaning that the 9/24/17 presidential proclamation will go into full effect while the appeal is pending. (Trump v. IRAP, 12/4/17)


November 21, 2017

In the Supreme Court, the government filed an application for a stay pending appeal, asking the Court to stay the district court’s 10/17/17 preliminary injunction. (Trump v. IRAP, 11/21/17)


October 20, 2017

The government filed a notice of appeal to the Fourth Circuit of the district court’s 10/17/17 grant of a nationwide preliminary injunction. (IRAP v. Trump, 10/20/17)


October 17, 2017

The district court judge granted a nationwide preliminary injunction prohibiting the enforcement of §2 of the 9/24/17 presidential proclamation, except with regard to (1) nationals of North Korea and Venezuela and (2) individuals lacking a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States. (IRAP v. Trump, 10/17/17)


October 10, 2017

The Supreme Court vacated the Fourth Circuit’s judgment, stating that the appeal no longer presents a live case or controversy. The Court remanded the case to the Fourth Circuit with instructions to dismiss the challenge of EO 13780 as moot. (Trump v. IRAP, 10/10/17)


October 6, 2017

On 10/5/17, IRAP filed a second amended complaint in district court challenging Executive Order 13780 as well as the 9/24/17 presidential proclamation. The next day, on 10/6/17, IRAP also filed in district court a motion for a preliminary injunction of the visa and entry restrictions imposed by the 9/24/17 proclamation. (IRAP v. Trump, 10/6/17)


October 5, 2017

Both the U.S. solicitor general and IRAP filed letter briefs on the issue of whether the case is moot, with the United States arguing that the appeal is now or soon will be moot, and IRAP arguing that the case is not moot. (Trump v. IRAP, 10/5/17)


September 25, 2017

The Supreme Court issued an order removing the case from the oral argument calendar and directing the parties to file briefs by 10/5/17 addressing whether, or to what extent, the presidential proclamation issued on 9/24/17 may render the case moot. (Trump v. IRAP, 9/25/17)


September 7, 2017

National CIS Council 119, a labor organization representing over 11,000 USCIS employees, filed an amicus brief providing an overview of the process for vetting refugees and stating that “robust and exhaustive” procedures are already used. (Trump v. IRAP, 9/7/17)


June 26, 2017

The Supreme Court granted certiorari, consolidated the 4th and 9th Circuit cases, and ruled that the travel and refugee bans “may not be enforced against foreign nationals who have a credible claim of a bona fide relationship” with a U.S. person or entity. (Trump v. IRAP, 6/26/17)


June 1, 2017

The government filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court appealing the Fourth Circuit’s preliminary injunction against Section 2(c) of Executive Order 13780, which suspended the entry of nationals of six Muslim-majority countries for 90 days. The government also filed an application for a stay of the preliminary injunction pending the disposition of the petition for certiorari. (International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, 6/1/17)


May 25, 2017

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed in substantial part the district court’s issuance of a nationwide preliminary injunction as to Section 2(c) of Executive Order 13780, which suspended the entry of nationals of six Muslim-majority countries for 90 days. The court agreed with the government that the district court erred in issuing an injunction against President Trump himself, and therefore lifted the injunction as to the President only. (International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, 5/25/17)

Attorney General Jeff Sessions issued a statement on International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, stating “this Department of Justice will continue to vigorously defend the power and duty of the Executive Branch to protect the people of this country from danger, and will seek review of this case in the United States Supreme Court.”


May 8, 2017

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals provided audio of the oral argument of the case heard at 2:30 pm (ET) on 5/8/17. (International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, 4/26/17)

Download the Audio File (MP3)

 


April 26, 2017

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an announcement that the court will post a link to real-time audio of the oral argument of the case, which will be heard at 2:30 pm (ET) on 5/8/17. The court will also post an audio file of the oral argument approximately an hour after the argument concludes. (International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, 4/26/17)


April 19, 2017

The district court issued an order staying proceedings until the resolution of the appellate proceedings concerning the preliminary injunction against Section 2(c) of Executive Order 13780. (International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, 4/19/17)


April 10, 2017

The district court issued an order denying the plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file a motion for a preliminary injunction against §6 of Executive Order 13780. On the same day, the Fourth Circuit ordered that the case be heard en banc. (International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, 4/10/17)


March 17, 2017

The government filed a notice of appeal to the Fourth Circuit. (International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, 3/17/17)


March 15, 2017

The court declined to issue an injunction blocking Executive Order 13780 in its entirety, but granted the motion for an injunction barring enforcement of Section 2(c) of the order. (International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, 3/15/17)


March 10, 2017

Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint seeking an injunction against Executive Order 13780, which replaced Executive Order 13769, as well as a motion for a Temporary Restraining Order. (International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, 3/10/17)


February 7, 2017

Plaintiffs filed a suit in federal district court seeking an injunction against Executive Order 13769 and a declaration that the entire Executive Order is invalid. (International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump, 2/7/17)