Tuesday , April 25 2017
Giglio.com US

Washington AG seeks to extend injunction on latest Trump travel ban

Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson speaks at a news conference in Seattle, Wash., in this Feb. 9, 2017, file photo. (AP Photo/Elaine Thompson, file)

 

March 09, 2017

The Washington attorney general whose legal challenge has blocked implementation of the Trump administration’s January executive order on travel and refugees is asking a federal judge to extend the injunction to prevent portions of the revised order from taking effect next week.

Attorney General Bob Ferguson will be joined by three other states — Minnesota, New York and Oregon — in the effort to prevent President Trump’s new travel ban from taking effect on March 16.

“In our view, this new executive order contains many of the same legal weaknesses as the first and reinstates some of the identical policies as the original,” Ferguson said.

As a result, the attorney general asked the federal judge overseeing the case to affirm that the nationwide injunction he issued on Feb. 3 regarding the first executive order will still apply to the revised version.

Trump signed the new order Monday under which visitors from six majority-Muslim countries — Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen — will be banned from obtaining visas to come to the United States for 90 days. Iraq is no longer on the list. The new version still will halt for 120 days all refugee resettlement, though it removed the original order’s permanent ban on refugees from Syria and exemptions for religious minorities, namely Christians.

Trump’s first executive order was in place for just a few days before U.S. District Judge James Robart issued an injunction putting implementation of the order on hold.

The action by the Washington attorney general comes a day after a Hawaii-based federal judge agreed to allow the first legal challenge to Trump’s revised executive order to move forward. Hawaii’s attorney general was allowed to amend the state’s prior legal complaint, which had challenged the constitutionality of the first travel ban, so that the lawsuit could challenge the revised version.