On December 8, 2017, the 4th Circuit heard en banc arguments in on the latest iteration of the Travel Ban. This morning, 285 pages of opinion were published, with the majority coming out against the ban (9 to 4). The NLJ reports: 'The Words of the President' Doom Trump Travel Ban, Fourth Circuit Says: "Here the government’s proffered rationale for the Proclamation lies at odds with the statements of the president himself," Fourth Circuit Chief Judge Roger Gregory wrote.
“When we compromise our values as to some, we shake the foundation as to all,” Chief Judge Roger Gregory said in the majority ruling.
“Examining official statements from President Trump and other executive branch officials, along with the Proclamation itself, we conclude that the Proclamation is unconstitutionally tainted with animus toward Islam,” Gregory wrote [p.28]. He added later: “Here the government’s proffered rationale for the Proclamation lies at odds with the statements of the president himself. Plaintiffs here do not just plausibly allege with particularity that the Proclamation’s purpose is driven by anti-Muslim bias, they offer undisputed evidence of such bias: the words of the President.”
Five of the nine judges in the majority also found that the challengers would succeed on their claims that the ban violates provisions in federal immigration law. Dissenting opinions were written by judges Paul Niemeyer, William Traxler Jr. and G. Steven Agee.The NLJ article contains nice snippets from each of the opinions (e.g., from Judges Gregory, Niemeyer, Wynn, Kennan, and Harris).
Posts
