TUESDAY'S BAN EO THREAD!
-
-
LISTEN TO THE ARGUMENTS LIVE, starting at 3p PT/6p ET, over DOJ's request to stay the TRO against Trump's ban EO:https://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/appeals-court-to-consider-whether-trumps-ban-should-stay-on?utm_term=.ab1z54woOa#.ipK20k4BpD …
-
Link to the 9th Circuit livestream, starting in minutes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEK8FCBMkMQ#action=share … (Cc/Hint:
#SCOTUS) -
LISTEN to the 9th Circuit's arguments now over whether to allow the federal government to enforce Trump's EO:https://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/appeals-court-to-consider-whether-trumps-ban-should-stay-on …
-
August Flentje, from the Justice Department, notes the "temporary nature" of the EO's actions in asking for the stay of the TRO.
-
Judge Canby: Are you arguing the merits of the stay or of the appeal itself?
-
Flentje: They overlap, but this is about the stay. Cites irreparable harm faced by the gov't if TRO stands. "National security function."
-
Friedland: Is this nonreviewable, or do you present evidence?
-
Flentje: Those convicted, and "deteriorating conditions" abroad that could lead to terrorism in the US.
-
Friedland: Any evidence? / Flentje: Things have been moving fast, but points to determination re: visa waiver program/countries of concern
-
Clifton: That's pretty abstract. It's not like there haven't been processes in place to take care who's coming in? Any ev there's real risk?
-
Flentje: President decided there's real risk.
-
Canby: In naming those countries, Congress laid out processes relating to visa. / Flentje: These proceedings have been moving fast ...
-
Friedland: You brought this to us — skipped over dist ct. / Flentje: A number of people from Somalia who have been connected to Al-Shabaab.
-
Friedland: Are you arguing that the president's decision in that regard are unreviewable. / Flentje: Yes, although there are const. limits.
-
Flentje points to Mandel/Din. / Friedland asks what provisions of Congress are being interpreted here. / Flentje points to 212(f).
-
Friedland: What limited review do you say is allowed? / Flentje: Bona fide and legit. / Friedland: There are allegations of bad faith here.
-
Flentje: Review should be limited to the four corners of the document. And, even then, only if a party in the US with standing to bring.
-
Flentje raises standing issues, but Canby notes air cases. / Flentje: A 3rd party can't challenge visa revocations.
-
Clifton jumps in: Yes, they can. Why can't Washington, re: its schools, do so.
-
Flentje: Goes to parens patriae, says that Washington can't bring under that theory. / Clifton says wife in Din. Scholars in Mandel.
-
Flentje goes back to the "right of the state on behalf of the people." / Clifton says, what about the universities?
-
Flentje: What is the constitutional interest of the university? / Clifton: In Din, she was claiming loss of consortium, but it was his visa.
-
Friedland: What about Pierce v. Society of Sisters? / Flentje: The university was challenging a state law that affected it students.
-
Friedland: Why can't we reach the merits here? / Flentje: A state entity can't assert these kind of rights.
-
Flentje adds that the order doesn't discriminate on the basis of religion, and no equal protection problems.
-
Canby: Could the president ban Muslims? / Flentje: That's not this. / Judges: Answer. / Flentje: A US citizen w a connection.
-
Friedland: What's the purpose of your standing argument? / Flentje repeats standing standards. There are plenty of cases w people affected.
-
Flentje: "I'm not sure I'm convincing the court (on standing)," so moving on to arg the TRO is overbroad.
-
Friedland: States are claiming EO violates Estab Clause. If so, isn't it facially invalid.
- 54 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.