

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals early Sunday morning denied a motion by the Justice Department on behalf of President Trump which sought to reinstate enforcement of an immigration and travel ban that targeted seven Muslim-majority nations.
The DOJ had filed an official appeal on Saturday night over a federal court ruling issued late Friday in Washington state by US District Court Judge James Robart. It was Robart's ruling, which included a temporary restraining order, that led both the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security on Saturday morning to halt their enforcement of the ban.
As CNN reports:
The Justice Department's strongly worded [Saturday night] court filing lodged a multi-pronged attack on Robart's decision, emphasizing that halting enforcement of the travel ban "harms the public" and "second-guesses the President's national security judgment" in the immigration context.
"(Robart's ruling) contravenes the considered judgment of Congress that the President should have the unreviewable authority to suspend the admission of any class of aliens," the Justice Department wrote in its filing.
"Courts are particularly ill-equipped to second-guess the President's prospective judgment about future risks. ...Unlike the President, courts do not have access to classified information about the threat posed by terrorist organizations operating in particular nations, the efforts of those organizations to infiltrate the United States, or gaps in the vetting process."
But though the Ninth Circuit agreed to hear the appeal--and asked for all parties to submit legal briefs to support their cases with a Monday deadline--it refused Trump's request to have the travel restrictions reimposed, stating: "Appellants' request for an immediate administrative stay pending full consideration of the emergency motion for a stay pending appeal is denied."
Since news arrived Saturday that the restrictions were lifted and airlines were told they could once again allow travelers from the targeted countries with proper documents to board planes to the U.S., those who had been left in limbo--many separated from families, employment opportunities, or school--were reportedly moving fast to make arrangements.
According to Reuters:
Iraqi Fuad Sharef, his wife and three children spent two years obtaining U.S. visas. They had packed up to move to America last week, but were turned back to Iraq after a failed attempt to board a U.S.-bound flight from Cairo.
On Sunday, the family checked in for a Turkish Airlines flight to New York from Istanbul.
"Yeah, we are very excited. We are very happy," Sharef told Reuters TV. "Finally, we have been cleared. We are allowed to enter the United States."
Rana Shamasha, 32, an Iraqi refugee in Lebanon, was due to travel to the United States with her two sisters and mother on Feb. 1 to join relatives in Detroit until their trip was canceled as a result of the travel ban.
She is now waiting to hear from U.N. officials overseeing their case. "If they tell me there is a plane tomorrow morning, I will go. If they tell me there is one in an hour, I will go," she told Reuters by telephone in Beirut, saying their bags were still packed. "I no longer have a house here, work, or anything," she said.
An official at Beirut airport said three Syrian families had left for the United States via Europe on Sunday morning.
Meanwhile, immigration experts and refugeee advocates, celebrated the court's ability to push back against the ban they argue is unconstitutional.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals early Sunday morning denied a motion by the Justice Department on behalf of President Trump which sought to reinstate enforcement of an immigration and travel ban that targeted seven Muslim-majority nations.
The DOJ had filed an official appeal on Saturday night over a federal court ruling issued late Friday in Washington state by US District Court Judge James Robart. It was Robart's ruling, which included a temporary restraining order, that led both the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security on Saturday morning to halt their enforcement of the ban.
As CNN reports:
The Justice Department's strongly worded [Saturday night] court filing lodged a multi-pronged attack on Robart's decision, emphasizing that halting enforcement of the travel ban "harms the public" and "second-guesses the President's national security judgment" in the immigration context.
"(Robart's ruling) contravenes the considered judgment of Congress that the President should have the unreviewable authority to suspend the admission of any class of aliens," the Justice Department wrote in its filing.
"Courts are particularly ill-equipped to second-guess the President's prospective judgment about future risks. ...Unlike the President, courts do not have access to classified information about the threat posed by terrorist organizations operating in particular nations, the efforts of those organizations to infiltrate the United States, or gaps in the vetting process."
But though the Ninth Circuit agreed to hear the appeal--and asked for all parties to submit legal briefs to support their cases with a Monday deadline--it refused Trump's request to have the travel restrictions reimposed, stating: "Appellants' request for an immediate administrative stay pending full consideration of the emergency motion for a stay pending appeal is denied."
Since news arrived Saturday that the restrictions were lifted and airlines were told they could once again allow travelers from the targeted countries with proper documents to board planes to the U.S., those who had been left in limbo--many separated from families, employment opportunities, or school--were reportedly moving fast to make arrangements.
According to Reuters:
Iraqi Fuad Sharef, his wife and three children spent two years obtaining U.S. visas. They had packed up to move to America last week, but were turned back to Iraq after a failed attempt to board a U.S.-bound flight from Cairo.
On Sunday, the family checked in for a Turkish Airlines flight to New York from Istanbul.
"Yeah, we are very excited. We are very happy," Sharef told Reuters TV. "Finally, we have been cleared. We are allowed to enter the United States."
Rana Shamasha, 32, an Iraqi refugee in Lebanon, was due to travel to the United States with her two sisters and mother on Feb. 1 to join relatives in Detroit until their trip was canceled as a result of the travel ban.
She is now waiting to hear from U.N. officials overseeing their case. "If they tell me there is a plane tomorrow morning, I will go. If they tell me there is one in an hour, I will go," she told Reuters by telephone in Beirut, saying their bags were still packed. "I no longer have a house here, work, or anything," she said.
An official at Beirut airport said three Syrian families had left for the United States via Europe on Sunday morning.
Meanwhile, immigration experts and refugeee advocates, celebrated the court's ability to push back against the ban they argue is unconstitutional.
The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals early Sunday morning denied a motion by the Justice Department on behalf of President Trump which sought to reinstate enforcement of an immigration and travel ban that targeted seven Muslim-majority nations.
The DOJ had filed an official appeal on Saturday night over a federal court ruling issued late Friday in Washington state by US District Court Judge James Robart. It was Robart's ruling, which included a temporary restraining order, that led both the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security on Saturday morning to halt their enforcement of the ban.
As CNN reports:
The Justice Department's strongly worded [Saturday night] court filing lodged a multi-pronged attack on Robart's decision, emphasizing that halting enforcement of the travel ban "harms the public" and "second-guesses the President's national security judgment" in the immigration context.
"(Robart's ruling) contravenes the considered judgment of Congress that the President should have the unreviewable authority to suspend the admission of any class of aliens," the Justice Department wrote in its filing.
"Courts are particularly ill-equipped to second-guess the President's prospective judgment about future risks. ...Unlike the President, courts do not have access to classified information about the threat posed by terrorist organizations operating in particular nations, the efforts of those organizations to infiltrate the United States, or gaps in the vetting process."
But though the Ninth Circuit agreed to hear the appeal--and asked for all parties to submit legal briefs to support their cases with a Monday deadline--it refused Trump's request to have the travel restrictions reimposed, stating: "Appellants' request for an immediate administrative stay pending full consideration of the emergency motion for a stay pending appeal is denied."
Since news arrived Saturday that the restrictions were lifted and airlines were told they could once again allow travelers from the targeted countries with proper documents to board planes to the U.S., those who had been left in limbo--many separated from families, employment opportunities, or school--were reportedly moving fast to make arrangements.
According to Reuters:
Iraqi Fuad Sharef, his wife and three children spent two years obtaining U.S. visas. They had packed up to move to America last week, but were turned back to Iraq after a failed attempt to board a U.S.-bound flight from Cairo.
On Sunday, the family checked in for a Turkish Airlines flight to New York from Istanbul.
"Yeah, we are very excited. We are very happy," Sharef told Reuters TV. "Finally, we have been cleared. We are allowed to enter the United States."
Rana Shamasha, 32, an Iraqi refugee in Lebanon, was due to travel to the United States with her two sisters and mother on Feb. 1 to join relatives in Detroit until their trip was canceled as a result of the travel ban.
She is now waiting to hear from U.N. officials overseeing their case. "If they tell me there is a plane tomorrow morning, I will go. If they tell me there is one in an hour, I will go," she told Reuters by telephone in Beirut, saying their bags were still packed. "I no longer have a house here, work, or anything," she said.
An official at Beirut airport said three Syrian families had left for the United States via Europe on Sunday morning.
Meanwhile, immigration experts and refugeee advocates, celebrated the court's ability to push back against the ban they argue is unconstitutional.