Following are snippets from the New York Times update on the legal fight over Trump’s executive order banning Muslim immigrants: Justice Department Urges Appeals Court to Reinstate Trump’s Travel Ban.
The Ninth Circuit scheduled the oral argument in the case for Tuesday [today] at 3 p.m. Pacific time. It is to take place by telephone, and the court said it would be live-streamed on its website. Holding an oral argument by telephone in a major case is unusual.
Here is the link to the court’s website.
The case will be heard by Judge William C. Canby Jr., appointed by President Jimmy Carter; Judge Michelle T. Friedland, appointed by President Barack Obama; and Judge Richard R. Clifton, appointed by President George W. Bush.
At issue is the earlier ruling, by Judge James L. Robart, a federal judge in Seattle, that blocked the key parts of Mr. Trump’s executive order. Judge Robart’s ruling allowed immigrants and travelers who had been barred from entry to come to the United States, and it inspired a harsh attack from Mr. Trump, who accused the judge of endangering national security.
On Saturday, the administration asked the Ninth Circuit for an immediate administrative stay of Judge Robart’s ruling without hearing from the plaintiffs, the States of Washington and Minnesota. The court declined, instead asking for more briefs.
Opponents of Mr. Trump’s targeted travel ban made three kinds of arguments in their submissions to the appeals court, saying that the ban is unlawful, that it represents bad national-security policy, and that it is a threat to the nation’s economy.
For analysis of the legal argument, see Some legal analysis of Trump’s Muslim travel ban executive order by AZBlueMeanie at Blog for Arizona. For more on the national security issues, check out the NY Times article summarized here.
On the third, economic point:
The third front in the legal battle against Mr. Trump’s order was opened by the technology industry and other businesses.
Almost 100 companies, including Apple, Facebook and Google, urged the Ninth Circuit to continue to block the order, saying it “harms the competitiveness of U.S. companies.”
The “instability and uncertainty” created by the order, the brief said, “will make it far more difficult and expensive for U.S. companies to hire some of the world’s best talent — and impede them from competing in the global marketplace.”