Immigration
Barred From U.S. Under Trump, Muslims Exult in Biden’s Open Door
Muslim Doctors Fight COVID-19 — And Islamophobia
Appeals court rules against latest Trump travel ban
Q-and-A: A look at most recent travel ban rulings
So far, the third time isn’t the charm for President Donald Trumps travel ban. As with his previous two attempts to bar travelers from certain predominantly Muslim nations from entering the United States, his Travel Ban 3.0 has run into an immediate buzz saw in the courts. Federal judges in Hawaii and Maryland blocked it in rulings Tuesday and Wednesday, just before it was due to take effect.
Federal judge blocks Trump’s third travel ban
A federal judge on Tuesday largely blocked the Trump administration from implementing the latest version of the presidents controversial travel ban, setting up yet another legal showdown on the extent of the executive branchs powers when it comes to setting immigration policy. The measure had been set to go into effect early Wednesday morning.
AILA: Latest Travel Ban Will Weaken Not Strengthen America
DHS Announces Implementation Of Travel Restriction Provisions | Homeland Security
U.S. lays out criteria for visa applicants from six Muslim nations
(SBU) Summary: On June 26, 2017, the Supreme Court partiallylifted preliminary injunctions that barred the Department from enforcingsection 2 of Executive Order (E.O.) 13780, which suspends the entry to theUnited States of, and the issuance of visas to, nationals of six designatedcountries, as well as section 6, which relates to the Refugee AdmissionsProgram. A June 14, 2017 Presidential Memorandum announced each enjoinedprovision would become effective the date and time at which the referencedinjunctions are lifted or stayed, with implementation of each relevantprovision within 72 hours after all applicable injunctions are lifted or stayed with respect to that provision. As a result, implementation of those sections for which injunctions have been lifted will begin June 29, 2017, as detailed below.
Who Will and Won’t Be Impacted by the Travel Ban After the Supreme Courts Decision
The Supreme Court has decided to hear the Travel Ban case when its fall session begins in October 2017. In the meantime, the Court will allow the administration to implement parts of President Trumps second executive order (EO-2), which bans the entry of nationals of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen from the United States.
The Latest: Sessions says travel ban needed for security
Trump travel ban showdown headed for Supreme Court
Documents in State of Hawaii et al v. Trump—A Challenge to President Trumps March 6, 2017 Travel Ban
On March 7, 2017, the State of Hawaii filed a joint motion with the U.S. Government setting out a proposed briefing schedule, whereby it will file its complaint and TRO by March 8, the U.S. Government will file their Opposition on March 13, and oral argument would be held on March 15. The District Court has not yet ruled on this joint request.
A Look at Legal Issues With Trumps Revised Travel Ban
DHS Statement on Compliance with Recent Court Order
Travelers from banned countries begin arriving in the U.S. as authorities suspend enforcement of travel ban
Trump bars Syrian refugees, halts entry of citizens from some Muslim states
Unknown number of U.S. permanent residents stuck overseas as a result of Trump’s immigration ban
An undetermined number of longtime U.S. residents have been stranded overseas as a result of President Trump's executive order temporarily blocking visas from seven countries in the Middle East and North Africa. All visa holders from those seven countries are now barred entry to the U.S., including lawful permanent residents, also known as green card holders, people with U.S. work visas and other types of visas, according to a senior U.S. immigration official. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.
Testing Federal Power Over Immigration
An upcoming birthright citizenship case at the Supreme Court could give some insight as to whether Donald Trump’s proposed ban on immigration could pass Constitutional muster. The “plenary power doctrine” essentially holds that Congress can make distinctions among immigrants—including some based on sex, race, and national origin—that (as the Court said in 1976) “would be unacceptable if applied to citizens.”