In Hawaii, they greet you with flowers, not religious tests. (Photo by Bob Riha, Jr/Virgin America via Getty Images)
Donald Trump’s revised travel ban is based on the same principles as his initial travel ban, but this time it’s dressed up to avoid the constitutional problems arising from his poorly written initial attempt.
Is anybody going to fall for it? Is anybody really going to say, “Well, it’s wearing lipstick, I can’t tell if it’s still a pig”?
Has Legal Industry Upheaval Changed Your Career Goals?
We'd love to hear your thoughts. Enter for a chance to win a $250 gift card.
Hawaii’s State Attorney General, Doug Chin, is having none of it. His office is first out of the gate with a legal challenge to Travel Ban 2.0.
And he’s doing it in the way that I think it should be done: instead of filing a new lawsuit over the so-called “new” ban, he’s simply amending his complaint to his old lawsuit based on this travel ban “revision.” From the Hawaii Civil Beat:
Hawaii sued the Trump administration on Feb. 3, the same day that U.S. District Court Judge James Robart in Seattle issued a temporary restraining order to put the travel ban on hold nationwide.
But U.S. District Court Judge Derrick Watson in Honolulu suspended Hawaii’s lawsuit four days later, until Robart’s temporary restraining order could ultimately be resolved.
In light of Trump’s new executive order, Hawaii Attorney General Doug Chin is asking Watson to lift his stay and allow the state to file an amended complaint, as well as a motion for a temporary restraining order. The state aims to keep the travel ban from taking effect.
This is exactly right. Travel Ban 2.0 is not “new.” It’s the same piece of disgusting bigotry as the first one, it’s just phrased differently. Hawaii’s central objections to the initial ban are not rendered moot by the Trump Administration’s attempts to make the ban sound more “politically correct.”
Keeping Law School Accessible When Federal Loans Fall Short
As federal borrowing caps tighten financing options for law students, one organization is stepping in to negotiate the terms they can't secure alone.
The key objections Hawaii has to the ban survive into Ban 2.0. From the New York Times:
In the latest legal filing, lawyers for the state argued that “the new executive order is resulting in the establishment of religion in the State of Hawaii contrary to its state Constitution.”
In addition, the state says, the ban “is inflicting immediate damage to Hawaii’s economy, educational institutions, and tourism industry; and it is subjecting a portion of the state’s citizens to second-class treatment and discrimination, while denying all Hawaii residents the benefits of an inclusive and pluralistic society.”
It also said Hawaiians and other Americans would be cut off from immediate family members living in the six countries affected by the ban.
The first ban was a poorly crafted legal document. Travel Ban 2.0 is an offensive and unconstitutional establishment of religion. Hawaii’s main objection is to the latter problem.
Now that the Trump Administration’s rank incompetence has been papered over, we can move on to fighting over the real issues.
Hawaii Plans To Sue Trump (Again) [Hawaii Civil Beat]
Hawaii Sues to Block Trump Travel Ban; First Challenge to Order [New York Times]
Earlier: Travel Ban 2.0: Trump Team Learns Value Of Using A Hood To Hide Bigotry
Elie Mystal is an editor of Above the Law and the Legal Editor for More Perfect. He can be reached @ElieNYC on Twitter, or at [email protected]. He will resist.