While we were sleeping: A federal judge in Maryland also blocked a section of @POTUS' travel ban.
Two for two.http://huff.to/2muxRRX
.@cristianafarias 2 differences b/n Hawaii, Maryland ruling 1. MD ruling is a preliminary injunction, not TRO. No question appealable
-
-
2. Md order bars only travel ban in section 2 of EO. Hawaii ban addresses section 2 and section 6, blocking refugee moratorium
-
So while Md case seeking stay would be procedurally easier, it is not as broad in the relief granted.
-
What MD and Hawaii have in common: both find Establishment Clause violation based on animus, animus based on Trump statements.
-
And while both agree national security is paramount, both see that as pretext in this case for religious animus from Trump statements
-
As I said yesterday, this is really unusual discriminatory purpose case in that there is smoking gun evidence (from Trump) of such purpose
-
Usually politicians are more circumspect, even if they harbor actual racial animus, which is why it is hard to win intent cases.
-
Scheduled to be on NPR's
@hereandnow a bit later talking about what's next in these travel ban cases.
End of conversation
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.