Washington v. Trump
| State of Washington and State of Minnesota v. Trump | |
|---|---|
 |
|
| United States District Court for the Western District of Washington | |
| Full case name | State of Washington and State of Minnesota, Plaintiffs, v. Donald J. Trump, in his official capacity as President of the United States; U.S. Department of Homeland Security; John F. Kelly, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security; Tom Shannon, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of State; and the United States of America, Defendants. |
| Citations | No. 2:17-cv-00141; No. 17-35105 |
State of Washington and State of Minnesota v. Trump, No. 2:17-cv-00141 (W.D.Wash. 2017), pending interlocutory appeal No. 17-35105 (9th Cir. 2017), is a lawsuit pending in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington that challenges the lawfulness and constitutionality of Executive Order 13769, an executive order signed by U.S. President Donald Trump.
A few days after the order was signed, the state of Washington filed suit alleging that the executive order is unconstitutional because it, among other reasons, violates the fifth amendment guarantee of equal protection under the law because it was intended to harm and discriminate against their States' residents based upon their national origin or religion, and therefore it also violates the establishment clause because it was meant to "disfavor Islam and give preference to Christianity". The federal government argued that the Constitution grants the President of the United States "unreviewable authority" over immigration matters and that the non-citizens the executive order affects do not have due process rights.
On February 3, Judge James L. Robart issued a nationwide temporary restraining order which forbade the federal government from enforcing certain provisions of the order. The federal government, in turn, filed an appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. That court, however, denied the government's request to stay the temporary restraining order as the federal government failed to show it was likely to succeed at trial, thereby maintaining the prohibition on the government in enforcing the executive order.
...
Wikipedia