Donovan backs new challenge to Trump on immigration

Vermont Attorney General TJ Donovan is supporting Hawaii’s suit alleging that President Donald Trump’s revised immigration order is unconstitutional.

Donovan’s support came in the form of an amicus brief filed Monday and backed by nine other state attorneys general. Following Trump’s first executive order, Donovan and 14 other attorneys general filed two similar briefs in support of legal challenges by Washington and Minnesota.

Trump’s first immigration order, which banned travel to the United States by citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries and halted the intake of refugees, was blocked in federal court. On Feb. 13, Virginia federal District Judge Leonie Brinkema ruled that the order discriminated against Muslims.

Instead of appealing the federal ruling to the Supreme Court, the White House drafted a new order that, unlike the first ban, was reviewed by the departments of Justice, Homeland Security and State, and is seen as carefully crafted to withstand a legal challenge.

Trump’s revised order removes language protecting religious minorities and does not revoke visas of travelers who have already obtained them. It also removes Iraq from the list of banned countries, instead ordering a suspension of visa processing for six Muslim-majority countries.

The new order will be enforced starting Wednesday.

The amicus brief Donovan signed argues that the revised order, like the first iteration, will “inflict economic damage” to the states’ businesses and diminish tax revenue. It also argues that the order will “hinder the States from effectuating the policies of religious tolerance and non discrimination enshrined in our laws and state constitutions.”

“The ban will inhibit the free exchange of information, ideas, and talent between the six designated countries and the States, including at the States’ many educational institutions,” the brief continues.

After Trump’s first order, Vermont colleges warned international students of potential travel complications should they leave the country during school breaks. According to Seven Days, Trump’s first order barred a foreign candidate for a job at Champlain College from visiting the state for an interview.

In addition to Hawaii’s challenge, a slew of advocacy groups filed separate legal challenges to Trump’s order, including the American Civil Liberties Union.

In a conference call with reporters Tuesday, the ACLU’s deputy legal director, Cecillia Wang, said the revised order continued to violate the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause, which bars discrimination based on religion.

“No matter how far President Trump tries to run away from his initial statements that this was a ban on Muslims, he can’t erase where this order originated — in an effort to discriminate against Muslims on the basis of their religion,” Wang said. “And for the reason, we and other litigants around the country are continuing to challenge the executive order.”

In its suit, the ACLU will point to remarks by Trump and his associates, including former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, that explicitly described the order as a “Muslim ban.” These past remarks proved powerful evidence of discrimination during the legal challenge of the first order in federal court.

Top Trump adviser Stephen Miller said the new order, while tweaked, is drafted to deliver the same “basic policy outcome.”

The White House’s justification of the travel ban is to curb national security threats from countries associated with terrorism, though none of the countries targeted in the ban has bred terrorists involved in recent attacks in America.

A two-page letter by Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly and Attorney General Jeff Sessions was filed in opposition to the Hawaii suit last week.

Sessions and Kelly wrote that a pause on immigration is necessary to review vetting procedures in these countries.

“At present, more than 300 persons who came to the United States as refugees are under investigation for potential terrorism-related activities,” Sessions and Kelly wrote. “There are currently approximately 1,000 pending domestic terrorism-related investigations, and it is believed that a majority of those subjects are inspired, at least in part, by ISIS.”

The White House has declined to say how many of the 300 refugees, if any, came from the targeted countries.

Although Trump’s initial order suspended the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program indefinitely, the new decree pauses the program for 120 days, pending review of the vetting process. The suspension does not apply to refugees whose travel details will be confirmed by the formal implementation of the order on Wednesday.

Trump’s order also cuts the number of refugees allowed into the United States in the 2016 fiscal year by more than half, from 110,000 to 50,000.

Unless the ban is overturned, the refugee restrictions mean that Syrian resettlement in Rutland won’t resume until July, at the earliest.

But by pausing the refugee program, the approval process could fall apart. In 120 days, many applicants’ approvals would expire, and they would likely have to begin the process at step one after the freeze is lifted, according to Stacie Blake, the director of government and community relations at the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants.

HIAS, the country’s largest refugee resettlement group, has joined the ACLU lawsuit fighting the Trump ban. On Tuesday Mark Hatfield, the president of HIAS, said the ban has drastically reduced the number of refugees who will make it to the United States this year.

Hatfield said his organization has “1,000 refugees totally approved and vetted in the pipeline who will have to wait for months or possibly much longer before they can come to this country, and safety.”

The post Donovan backs new challenge to Trump on immigration appeared first on VTDigger.