New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas filed a brief this week in support of Hawaii's challenge to President Trump's revised executive order temporarily banning travel to the USA from six Muslim-majority nations in the Middle East.
The attorney general's office of Washington state will file an amended complaint asking federal Judge James Robart in Seattle to block President Donald Trump's new travel ban, according to a source with knowledge of the planning.
But critics say the new order essentially remains a ban on Muslims coming to the United States, and therefore unconstitutional because it singles out people of a certain religion for discrimination.
The attorneys general argue that the revised ban retains the unconstitutional components of the original order, including a broad ban on entry by nationals from several predominantly Muslim countries and a suspension of the refugee program. And for 90 days, no new visas would be granted to travelers from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.
At 3:30 p.m. ET the state of Hawaii, which was the first state to challenge the new ban, will participate in its own hearing.
Should the federal courts decline to extend the current restraining order, and in turn allow the new ban to kick in at midnight, all eyes will swing to the main US arrivals ports, notably Dulles [in Washington, D.C.], JFK in New York, LAX in Los Angeles and O'Hare in Chicago.
It is Robart who will oversee the Washington state hearing on Wednesday and he could once again suspend all or part of the new order.
Winter weather advisory issued for Luzerne, Lackawanna counties
A shift farther east (out over the ocean) with the storm track and everyone gets more snow . Forecasters also say there is a chance that more significant snow could happen on Tuesday .
A federal judge in Hawaii has also scheduled a hearing Wednesday on the revised ban.
There's no denying, however, that the Trump administration will have a much stronger case defending the revised ban compared with the original one. Unlike the earlier version, the March 6 order explicitly exempts from the ban natives of the targeted countries who have gained legal USA residency or hold valid US visas.
Despite Trumps claim that the revisions would satisfy the courts previous objections, the states lawyers noted that presidential adviser Stephen Miller said February 21 that the new order would have mostly minor technical differences but the same basic policy outcome as the first order. A federal judge in Madison acknowledged some "important differences" between the original executive order and the new one, but ultimately concluded this particular Syrian family faces "a significant risk of irreparable harm" given "the daily threats to the lives plaintiff's wife and child remaining in Aleppo, Syria".
The Trump administration's decision to issue a revised EO represents a concession of the first order's legal indefensibility.
In the Hawaii filing defending Trumps order, Justice Department lawyers described it as a brief time-out for review of US terrorist screening measures.
Hawaii sued in conjunction with a plaintiff named Ismail Elshikh, an American citizen from Egypt who is an imam at the Muslim Association of Hawaii.
Informal statements by the president or his surrogates, before or after the election, that do not directly concern the order are irrelevant, the government lawyers said.