A group of 13 states have come out in support of President Donald Trump’s revised travel ban [text]. Twelve state attorneys general and one governer filed a brief [text, PDF] with the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit [official website] Monday stating that the president lawfully acted in the interest of national security. The states claim that the action is not a “pretext for religious discrimination” and does nnot violated the constitution. The states, which include Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas and West Virginia, argue that:
The Executive Order’s temporary pause in entry by nationals from six countries and in the refugee program neither mentions any religion nor depends on whether affected aliens are Muslim. Thus, the Executive Order is emphatically not a “Muslim Ban.”
Opponents of the order argue [Bloomberg report] that it specifically targets Muslim countries, harms state economies and is unconstitutional. The appeal is the result of a ruling [order, PDF] from a Maryland federal judge earlier this month that found the Trump travel ban violated the constitution. The Fourth Circuit is set to hear oral arguments in the case on May 8.
Trump’s revised travel ban has faced continued legal challenges even in the face of corrections to the order. Earlier this month a judge for the US District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin granted a temporary restraining order [JURIST report] against Trump’s revised immigration ban to a Syrian asylum seeker and his family. The order is limited to the one man and his family and will remain in effect only until the asylum request for his wife and child can be resolved. The revised immigration ban removed Iraq from its list of countries, implemented a waiver system, and used language that is religion neutral. The ban still temporarily blocks immigrants from six countries and decreases the amount of refugees being admitted into the country.