Why did a US judge stop Trump's immigration ban?

A US judge has issued the most significant ruling yet on Trump's immigration ban after receiving a lawsuit from the Washington state attorney general.

Judge James Robart, who ruled to suspend Trump's immigration ban. Photo: ST.

US federal judge James Robart in Seattle, Washington state, on February 3 issued a ruling requesting a suspension of the implementation of key provisions of the immigration restriction decree that President Donald Trump signed after taking office, according to the Seattle Times.

The ruling came after Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson, a Democrat, filed a lawsuit on January 30 against the executive order signed by President Trump three days earlier. In the lawsuit, Ferguson argued that Trump's immigration restrictions targeted Muslims, violating the constitutional rights of immigrants and their families.

In the 19-page lawsuit, Mr. Ferguson alleges that President Trump's executive order violates provisions guaranteeing religious liberty and equality stipulated in the US Constitution.

The lawsuit also cites statements made by Mr. Trump during the election campaign, such as his pledge to “close the door completely on Muslim immigration to the United States.” The plaintiffs claim that President Trump’s executive order is “hate-motivated and designed to harm a specific group of people.”

“The federal courts have no more sacred role than to protect minorities from discrimination,” Ferguson’s lawsuit, which is backed by major US corporations, including Amazon and Expedia, said in a statement. The companies said Trump’s immigration ban had had a negative impact on the economy, education, businesses, families and citizens of Washington state.

Americans protest Trump's immigration restrictions

During a court hearing yesterday, a representative of the University of Washington said that the "direct and immediate" consequences of many of their students and faculty being stranded abroad due to the immigration restrictions.

After Ferguson filed the lawsuit, lawyers representing the Trump administration filed a counter-suit on February 2, arguing that the lawsuit lacked legal basis and that the President had appropriately exercised his power to protect the American people.

“No president in the past 30 years has used this power to suspend or restrict the entry of certain foreign nationals, in some cases based on nationality,” the petition reads, citing previous court rulings that the US Constitution does not provide for the right of foreign nationals to enter the United States.

In an earlier press conference, Susan Hutchison, head of the Republican Party in Washington state, accused Mr. Ferguson of filing the lawsuit solely for political purposes, to serve his future efforts to run for the position of state governor.

"I think he knows his case is on very weak legal ground," Ms. Hutchison said. "I'm not a lawyer, but I've talked to lawyers and they all say the case is very shaky."

US President Donald Trump signs an executive order. Photo: AP.

However, Judge Robart rejected this. In his oral ruling issued on the afternoon of February 3, the judge appointed by former President George W. Bush invalidated several key points of Trump's executive order. Mr. Robart issued his written ruling later that evening.

Judge Robart's ruling prohibits "federal officers from enforcing Trump's executive order," and he made clear that the ruling applies nationwide.

According to a statement released by Ferguson shortly after, Judge Robart's ruling will temporarily suspend Trump's immigration ban, until Judge Robart issues a final ruling to determine whether the lawsuit is legal and constitutional. "If Ferguson wins, Trump's immigration ban will be permanently invalidated nationwide," the statement emphasized.

Previously, many other judges across the US also issued different rulings related to Trump's immigration ban. Detroit Judge Victoria Roberts ruled that green card holders were protected from Trump's ban, although the White House later confirmed that these people were not subject to the ban.

In Boston, Judge Nathaniel Gorton again refused to extend a temporary injunction that would allow some people affected by Trump's ban to enter the country. The temporary injunction, issued by a New York judge, requires the US government not to deport people detained at airports because of the President's ban.

According to observers, Judge Robart's ruling has had the most far-reaching impact to date, and can even be considered a major step back in President Trump's policy. The US Customs and Border Protection has allowed those affected by Mr. Trump's entry ban to board planes to the US after receiving Judge Robart's ruling.

In a statement after the ruling, the White House said the Justice Department plans to defend the president's executive order, arguing that Trump has the constitutional authority to "protect the American people." By law, the White House can appeal to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn Judge Robart's ruling and restore the immigration ban.

According to VNE