article: This lawsuit was filed on October 6, 2017 over Section 2 of President Trump’s Sep. 24, 2017 Proclamation ("Executive Order #3" or "EO-3") barring travel to the United States from six Muslim-majority countries. The plaintiffs were U.S. citizens or permanent residents who would not be able to reunite with their family members or who otherwise claimed injury as a direct result of EO-3. Specifically, the plaintiffs were a Syrian national and U.S. lawful permanent resident ("LPR"), a U.S. citizen of Syrian descent with a Syrian national sister currently outside of the U.S., an American citizen of Yemeni descent with a Yemeni national wife currently outside of the U.S., a U.S. citizen with a Syrian national wife currently outside of the U.S., an American citizen of Syrian descent with a Syrian national father currently outside of the U.S., and an American citizen with a Somali national fiancé currently outside of the U.S.. The plaintiffs, represented by the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Brennan Center, and private counsel, filed a concurrent complaint and motion for a preliminary injunction in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The complaint alleged that EO-3 violated the First Amendment Establishment Clause, the Administrative Procedure Act, and the Immigration and Nationality Act. The plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief enjoining the defendants nationwide from enforcing Section 2 of EO-3 across the nation. On October 12, the government responded to the motion for a preliminary injunction, and the plaintiffs replied on October 14. The case was assigned to Judge Theodore D. Chuang, who was also presiding over <a href="http://www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=15637">IRAP v. Trump</a>. He held a hearing on the Preliminary Injunction motion on October 16. The following day, Judge Chuang granted the motion in part, enjoining all defendants, with the exception of the President of the United States, from enforcing Section 2 of EO-3 nationwide. On October 20, the defendants appealed Judge Chuang's decision to the Fourth Circuit (docket no. 17-2233) and requested that the Fourth Circuit stay the injunction pending resolution of the appeal. The defendants also requested accelerated processing of the appellate case, which the plaintiffs opposed the following day. Also on October 20, the Fourth Circuit consolidated this case with <a href="https://www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=15637">IRAP v. Trump</a> and <a href="https://www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=16193">Iranian Alliances Across Borders v. Trump</a>. From October 20 through October 25, the parties continued to file responses regarding the motion to accelerate processing of the case. On October 24, the States of Texas, Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and West Virginia filed an amicus brief in support of the government's motion to stay the district court's injunction. On October 27, the Iranian Alliances Across Borders and IRAP plaintiffs responded to the government's motion to stay the injunction pending appeal. Also on October 27, the government requested that the Court schedule oral argument for December 8, immediately after the current Ninth Circuit oral argument in <a href="https://www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=15626">Hawaii v. Trump</a>. On October 31, the Court granted this request. On October 30, the Department of Justice ("DOJ") responded to the plaintiffs' motion to stay. On November 1, the DOJ submitted its opening brief, arguing that the plaintiffs' claims were not justiciable and that EO-3 fell well within the President's constitutional and statutory authority. Also on November 1, amici began filing briefs with the Court. On November 15, the plaintiffs filed their opening/response brief. The DOJ responded on November 22. On November 22, the court submitted a letter requesting that the DOJ supplement the record with two reports referenced in both the DOJ's opening brief and EO-3: a report submitted to the President on July 9, 2017, identifying "16 countries as having 'inadequate' information sharing practices and risk factors, and another 31 countries as 'at risk' of becoming inadequate," and a report submitted to the President on September 15, 2017, recommending that the President impose entry restrictions on certain nationals from seven of the countries determined to have inadequate information sharing practices and risk factors. On November 24, the DOJ responded, noting that the requested reports contain classified information and requesting that any reviewing of the reports take place in camera and ex parte. This case is ongoing. Oral argument on the government's motion to stay the district court's injunction pending appeal is scheduled for December 8, and will be held en banc. Because this case was consolidated with <a href="https://www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=16193">Iranian Alliances Across Borders v. Trump</a> into <a href="https://www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=15637">IRAP v. Trump</a> on October 20, 2017, further updates on activity within this case can be found at <a href="https://www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=15637">IRAP v. Trump</a>.
summary: This is a lawsuit filed against Section 2 of President Trump’s Sep. 24, 2017 Proclamation ("Executive Order #3" or "EO-3") barring travel to the United States from six Muslim-majority countries. The plaintiffs are US citizens or permanent residents who will not be able to reunite with their family members or who otherwise claim injury as a direct result of EO-3. The plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief: they asked the court to enjoin defendants nationwide from enforcing Section 2 of EO-3 across the nation.