The Trump administration has turned to the Supreme Court in the ongoing legal dispute over President Trump’s refugee and travel executive order.
On Thursday night, the Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to hear the government’s appeal of the recent federal appellate decision to uphold a lower court’s order that halted enforcement of the travel ban.
Additionally, and potentially having a more instant effect, the department asked for the Supreme Court to allow the federal government to start enforcing the moment version of the travel and refugee executive order that Trump signed in March with two other filings to the justices.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions had said the request for the justices to hear — and ultimately reverse — the decision of the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit would be forthcoming.
Additionally, the department asked the justices to issue a stay of the injunction entered in that case — International Refugee Assistance Project (IRAP) v. Trump — until the justices resolve the case. In that case, the Fourth Circuit upheld a district court injunction against the specific portion of the executive order banning travel for a limited time from six Muslim-majority countries.
The department also filed a moment stay request, asking the justices to do the injunction on hold that was entered in a challenge to the executive order out of Hawaii — Hawaii v. Trump — that is now on appeal before a different appeals court, the Ninth Circuit, until that case is ultimately resolved. The injunction entered in that case is more broad, covering the entire refugee and travel ban sections of the order.
whether both of those stays are granted, as requested, the Trump administration would be allowed to enforce Trump’s travel and refugee executive order while the questions raised in the challenges to the executive order are being heard by the justices.
The Justice Department lawyers argue that the justices should hear the IRAP case, called a petition for a writ of certiorari, because the “remarkable holding” of the Fourth Circuit “is wrong and in manifest need of this Court’s review.”
Notably, while it takes four votes to hear the appeal, it would choose five votes of the nine justices (assuming total, or even eight, participate in hearing the case) to grant the stays requested.
This is a developing myth. Please check back to BuzzFeed News for the latest.
Chris Geidner is the legal editor for BuzzFeed News and is based in Washington, DC. In 2014, Geidner won the National Lesbian & homosexual Journalists organization award for journalist of the year.
Contact Chris Geidner at [email protected].
Got a confidential tip? Submit it here.