ACLU Comment on Maryland Muslim Ban Ruling

NEW YORK — A federal court in Maryland blocked President Trump’s newest Muslim ban from taking effect today. A federal court in Hawaii issued a similar ruling on Tuesday in a separate challenge. The American Civil Liberties Union and partner organizations were in court Monday in Maryland to challenge this latest version of the ban — the president’s third such attempt.

Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, was among those arguing the case and had this reaction to the Maryland ruling:

“Like the two versions before it, President Trump’s latest travel ban is still a Muslim ban at its core. And like the two before it, this one is going down to defeat in the courts. Religious discrimination with window dressing is still unconstitutional.”

Like the previous versions, the new ban announced last month seeks to block travel to the United States from six Muslim-majority countries — in this version, Chad, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen. The new ban also includes North Koreans and certain Venezuelan government officials. The Maryland order does not block the Venezuela or North Korea provisions, or application of the ban to individuals who do not have bona fide relationships with entities or individuals in the United States while litigation is ongoing. The Hawaii order does not have the bona fide relationship exception.

International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump is brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Maryland, National Immigration Law Center, and International Refugee Assistance Project (IRAP) at the Urban Justice Center on behalf of HIAS, IRAP, the Middle East Studies Association, Yemeni American Merchants Association, and the Arab American Association of New York.

The opinion can be found here:
https://www.aclu.org/legal-document/irap-v-trump-memorandum-opinion

More information is at: https://www.aclu.org/cases/international-refugee-assistance-project-v-trump