Another judge blocks new travel ban. Derrick Watson, a Federal judge in Hawaii, has placed a temporary restraining order on the new travel ban issued by the President on March 6. The stay comes just hours before the Executive Order 13780 was scheduled to be enforced. The restriction applies nationwide and it also applies to the issuance of visas. The judge established that, according to him, the main purpose of the ban is to prevent Muslims from entering the US and therefore it is unconstitutional. This idea stems from statements made by Donald Trump during his electoral campaign and by people close to him. Such statements overshadow any national security concern.

Travel Ban Court Cases at Critical Point

Travel Ban 2.0 Being Challenged in Hawaii and More, Everything You Need to Know

Hawaii Judge Blocks Donald Trump’s Refugee Reform as Violation of Muslims’ Rights

Federal Court In Hawaii Blocks Donald Trump’s New Travel Ban

The judge also stated that the second plaintiff in the case, the imam Ismail Elshikh, has the right to sue the federal government for visas to allow his relatives to live in the USA.

These two facts are relevant because they establish that the intention, stated or inferred, supersedes the content of a government document. It also grants constitutional rights to people who are not US citizens and who have never lived in the United States.

What Is Actually Blocked in the Executive Order

The temporary restraining order by Judge Watson blocks the two major components of the travel ban.

Section 2:

“The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National Intelligence, shall conduct a worldwide review to identify whether, and if so what, additional information will be needed from each foreign country to adjudicate an application by a national of that country for a visa, admission, or other benefit under the INA (adjudications) in order to determine that the individual is not a security or public-safety threat. The Secretary of Homeland Security may conclude that certain information is needed from particular countries even if it is not needed from every country.

… I therefore direct that the entry into the United States of nationals of those six countries [Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen] be suspended for 90 days from the effective date of this order, subject to the limitations, waivers, and exceptions set forth in sections 3 and 12 of this order.”


Section 6:

“The Secretary of State shall suspend travel of refugees into the United States under the USRAP, and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall suspend decisions on applications for refugee status, for 120 days after the effective date of this order, subject to waivers pursuant to subsection (c) of this section.”

The Department of Justice said that it “strongly disagrees” with the ruling. It called it “flawed both in reasoning and in scope.”

Donald Trump Wows to Fight All the Way to the Supreme Court

During a rally in Tennessee, President Donald Trump stated yesterday that he will fight the court decision all the way.

“This new order was tailored to the dictates of the Ninth Circuit’s, in my opinion, flawed ruling. This is the opinion of many — an unprecedented judicial overreach.”

He mentioned that he had been unwilling to replace the original order. He also suggested that he might go back to that one and just fight over it.

Donald Trump Fumes Against ‘Judicial Overreach’ After Immigration Order Blocked Again

Robert Barnes: Hawaii Obama Judge Rules Muslim Imam Has Special Constitutional Rights to Bring Anyone from Terror Countries into America

“We’re going to win. The danger is clear. The law is clear. The need for my executive order is clear.”

“The best way to keep foreign terrorists or, as some people would say, in certain instances, radical Islamic terrorists, from attacking our country, is to stop them from entering our country in the first place,”

In Wisconsin, a federal judge already agreed to issue a narrow temporary hold on the new travel ban. It prevents the policy from applying to a specific Syrian refugee and his family. More decisions are expected on this issues from Maryland and Washington State. These decisions could open a whole new approach to people who wish to appeal the denial of visas.