44 articles
Harold Hongju Koh, formerly legal adviser to the U.S. State Department, is Sterling Professor of International Law and Co-Director of the Rule of Law Clinic at Yale Law School, which submitted an amicus brief on behalf of 52 former national security officials in support of respondents in Trump v. Hawaii.
John Eastman is the Henry Salvatori Professor of Law & Community Service at Chapman University’s Fowler School of Law. He is also a senior fellow and director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence at the Claremont Institute, on whose behalf he filed an amicus curiae brief in support of the federal government’s position in Trump v. Hawaii.
Kristen Waggoner serves as senior vice president of the U.S. legal division with Alliance Defending Freedom, which submitted an amicus brief in support of neither party in Trump v. Hawaii.
[Editor’s Note: This post, originally published at 12:11 p.m., was expanded with additional analysis at 2:05 p.m.] The Supreme Court today handed a major victory to the Trump administration.
Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia is the Samuel Weiss Faculty Scholar and founding director of the Center for Immigrants’ Rights Clinic at Penn State Law. She co-authored an amicus brief for scholars of immigration law on the history of the Immigration and Nationality Act in support of Hawaii in Trump v. Hawaii.
Thomas M. Fisher is the solicitor general of Indiana, which joined 14 other states and the governors of two states in an amicus brief supporting the administration in Trump v. Hawaii. [Note: The views stated herein are those of the author alone and are not attributable to the attorney general of Indiana or the state of Indiana.]
It has been nearly 15 months since President Donald Trump first issued an order that banned travel to the United States by nationals of seven countries, all of which have overwhelmingly Muslim populations.
It’s a warm but drizzly day in Washington as people line up for the last argument of October Term 2017. Some have spent a night or two in the public line, while the well-connected have tickets.
On Wednesday, April 25, the justices will take the bench for the final oral argument scheduled for this term. Fittingly, the case on their docket that day is one of the biggest of the year: Trump v. Hawaii, the challenge to the latest iteration of President Donald Trump’s efforts to restrict travel to the United States by nationals from certain countries.
This morning the Supreme Court released its April argument calendar, which includes oral argument in Hawaii’s challenge to the travel restrictions imposed on nationals from eight countries in President Donald Trump’s September 24, 2017, order.
When, if ever, should courts bar the federal government from enforcing a law against anyone, not just against the plaintiffs in the case before them? Courts have issued these types of orders — often referred to as “nationwide injunctions” — with increasing frequency over the past decade.
The Supreme Court will hear oral argument on the challenge to President Donald Trump’s September 24 order, the latest version of what is often known as his “travel ban,” which limited travel from eight countries: Libya, Iran, Somalia, Syria, Yemen, North Korea, Venezuela and Chad.