Inquisitive Ninth Circuit Hears Oral Argument in Executive Order Appeal | American Center for Law and Justice
  Search  |  Login  |  Register

ACLJ Profile Completion

Verified

Ninth Circuit Hears Oral Argument in EO Appeal

By Edward White1494944734484

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, based in San Francisco, California, is the second federal appellate court within the past two weeks to consider the President’s revised immigration Executive Order, designed to protect our nation from foreign terrorists. As reported last week, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, sitting en banc in Richmond, Virginia, also heard oral argument in a separate legal challenge to the Executive Order.

The Executive Order was designed to pause entry, on a temporary basis, into the United States of refugees and nationals from six unstable and/or terrorism-infested countries: Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. The clear purpose of the Executive Order is to allow time for needed improvements to the immigration and refugee screening processes from these countries – something we’ve been urging for some time.

The American Center for Law & Justice (“ACLJ”) filed amicus curiae (“friend-of-the-court”) briefs in both the Fourth and the Ninth Circuits supporting the constitutionality of the Executive Order. Each brief was joined by over 205,000 members of the ACLJ’s Committee to Defend Our National Security from Terror.

A panel of three Ninth Circuit judges, all appointed by President Clinton, is considering the government’s appeal from an injunction a federal trial judge in Hawaii entered to halt enforcement of the Executive Order on a nationwide basis.

The main focus of the oral argument was on the President’s campaign comments, which have been wrongly interpreted as evidence of a “Muslim ban.” The government attorney properly explained that those comments were made by a private citizen during a political campaign and should not be considered. Rather, the court should look at the face of the Executive Order, which is clearly intended to protect our nation from terrorists, and defer to the President’s authority over immigration matters.

Astonishingly, yet unsurprisingly, plaintiffs’ attorney conceded that if this same Executive Order had been issued by any other President (without President Trump’s campaign rhetoric), it would be a constitutional exercise of Executive authority. This was the same absurd argument espoused by plaintiffs in the Fourth Circuit case.

Additionally, when the plaintiffs’ attorney criticized the government’s call for deference to the President, one of the judges pointed out that that same attorney had submitted briefs in other cases in which he also argued that courts should defer to the President’s immigration decisions.

The government attorney explained that the nationwide injunction should be reversed in full. In the alternative, he argued that if the court did not strike down the entire injunction it should modify the injunction to apply only to the few plaintiffs involved in the case (instead of applying nationwide) and allow the other aspects of the Executive Order, currently enjoined by the Hawaii federal judge, to go into effect, including the review of the vetting process of people coming from the six countries of concern.

A decision from the Ninth Circuit is expected in the coming weeks. The ACLJ will continue to keep you posted on this case and our other efforts to defend our national security.

Defend Our National Security from Jihad

National Security  Signatures

LOGIN

Receive the latest news, updates, and contribution opportunities from ACLJ.

$20
$40
$60
$120
$240
Make this a monthly tax-deductible gift.

As we aggressively fight to protect our national security and Christians, we urgently need your support. Have your gift DOUBLED today. Have your gift doubled through our Matching Challenge.

Email Address is required.
First Name is required.
Last Name is required.
Credit Card Number is required.
Verification Code is required.
Expiration Month is required.
Expiration Year is required.
Receive the latest news, updates, and contribution opportunities from ACLJ.
Encourage your friends to sign and donate by sharing this petition.

Appeals Court Blocking National Security Efforts

By Edward White1510761223565

Yesterday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals stayed most of a Hawaii federal judge’s recent injunction against President Trump’s Proclamation to begin enhanced vetting procedures of foreign nationals seeking entry into the United States. The injunction prevented the full implementation of the...

read more

ACLJ to Tillerson: End Random Selection

By Jay Sekulow1509753515839

Today, the ACLJ sent a letter to the Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, advising him that he has the power to immediately close the legal loophole used by the terrorist Sayfullo Saipov to enter the United States: the Diversity Visa Program. There is no reason this program should remain in effect...

read more

ACLJ Defends National Security At Appeals Court

By Edward White1509660989141

The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) has filed a friend-of-the-court (amicus) brief at the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in support of President Trump’s recent Proclamation to begin enhanced vetting procedures of foreign nationals seeking entry into the United States. This appeal deals...

read more

Placing our National Security First

By Harry G. Hutchison1509645656501

On October 31, 2017 Sayfullo Saipov murdered eight innocents and seriously injured twelve others in New York City in an act of terror . Saipov perpetrated this brutal attack with a rented truck, running down pedestrians before crashing into a school bus. Then, he got out of the truck and witnesses...

read more