'An uncanny resemblance': Judge scoffs at Trump admin claims about new travel ban during arguments over refugee admissions program

A national justice successful Seattle says it's "more wide than ever" that clarity and enactment is needed to place the fig of refugees who person been allegedly affected by President Donald Trump's efforts to suspend the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) for 90-day intervals aft migration lawyers claimed Monday successful tribunal that the fig could beryllium successful the "hundreds oregon adjacent thousands" — acold much than the 160 who've been recognized.

Speaking astatine a proceeding successful the Western District of Washington connected Monday morning, U.S. District Judge Jamal Whitehead — a Joe Biden appointee — told Justice Department lawyers and attorneys representing a Congolese exile known by the pseudonym Pacito, who is suing the authorities implicit the USRAP suspension, that they tin "expect an bid from the tribunal by the extremity of the week" successful regards to establishing a ceremonial compliance model to measure eligibility for refugees nether an injunction helium granted successful February.

Monday's proceeding covered the Trump administration's effort to use his latest question ban to refugees the tribunal has ordered resettled nether Whitehead's preliminary injunction.

It is 1 of the archetypal cases wherever a national tribunal is considering the interaction of the U.S. Supreme Court's June 27 ruling limiting nationwide injunctions.

Love existent crime? Sign up for our newsletter, The Law&Crime Docket, to get the latest real-life transgression stories delivered close to your inbox.

In a filing past week, lawyers for Pacito insisted the precocious court's ruling had nary interaction connected their case. They filed a seven-page motion asking Whitehead to proceed enforcing the injunction that bars the Trump administration from attempting to "dismantle" the country's exile resettlement system.

The lawsuit stems from Trump's efforts to suspend USRAP "until specified clip arsenic the further introduction into the United States of refugees aligns with the interests of the United States." The plaintiffs, successful their lawsuit, called Trump's enforcement bid a "stark usurpation of national law" and accused Trump of violating the 1980 Refugee Act, which is portion of the broader Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). This national instrumentality "sets retired elaborate policies and procedures" that marque up the USRAP, according to the lawsuit, and the plaintiffs accidental portions of it are "statutorily mandated."

Attorney Jonathan Hawley, of Perkins Coie, said Monday that the Trump medication and the territory tribunal needed to instrumentality into relationship each of the radical who had question plans canceled "for reasons different than the exile ban" earlier it officially went into effect, and were past incapable to rebook them owed to said ban. He argued that adjacent though determination is simply a pending question for people certification, it should measurement successful favour of broader relief, and that "urgency" is cardinal owed to immoderate refugees having aesculapian conditions and wellness issues.

"We person grounds that the question prohibition was imposed adjacent earlier its effectual date, and so adjacent earlier January 20, 2025," Hawley asserted. "We cognize of astatine slightest 1 Afghan exile who had question scheduled for January 16, 2025, wherever question was canceled without reason, and the exile was ne'er rebooked for further travel."

Hawley said that the information that determination mightiness person been "pretextual cancellations successful the tally up to the enforcement order" mightiness explicate wherefore lone 160 injunction-protected refugees are being recognized successful a two-week period, starting Jan. 20.

"Given that determination are 52 weeks successful a twelvemonth and that 100,000-plus refugees are admitted annually, you would expect successful a fixed two-week play to spot thousands of refugees … for immoderate fixed two-week period," Hawley argued. "Here we lone person 160 … truthful the thought that the authorities mightiness person proactively canceled immoderate question due to the fact that of the exile prohibition is not lone probable, but likely."

Whitehead appeared to agree, saying astatine the extremity of the hearing: "As Mr. Hawley has pointed retired repeatedly … quality solution process, oregon immoderate you privation to telephone it, for evaluating the case-by-case reliance interests of the injunction-eligible refugees is needed."

At 1 point, the justice joined Hawley successful calling retired the Trump medication for trying to assertion that Trump's latest question prohibition was antithetic from the 1 helium issued during his archetypal term. DOJ lawyer David Kim claimed the 2 question bans differed successful wording and that the latest 1 recognized refugees portion his archetypal prohibition didn't, to which Hawley and Whitehead disagreed.

"I person the substance of these 2 carve-outs broadside by side, the aged question prohibition and the caller question ban, and I confess — I conflict to find immoderate meaningful quality from them," Hawley said.

"There's an uncanny resemblance there," Whitehead added.

Colin Kalmbacher contributed to this report.