The 5th Circuit has issued a decision on DACA. We are reviewing it and will share more information and guidance as we have it.

Civil Rights Groups Argue in the Fourth Circuit to Challenge Trump Administration’s Muslim Ban

Jan 28, 2020

Enforcement Racial Justice

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 28, 2020

CONTACT
Juan Gastelum, [email protected]; 213-375-3149

Civil Rights Groups Argue in the Fourth Circuit to Challenge the Trump Administration’s Muslim Ban

WASHINGTON, DC —  Today, three years after the Trump administration announced the first iteration of the Muslim ban, civil rights groups argued before the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in an ongoing challenge to the latest version of the Muslim ban, which the U.S. Supreme Court allowed to remain in effect in 2018. Today’s hearing focused on whether to allow civil rights groups to demand from the government more information about the origins of the ban. Over the past three years, the administration has continued to separate families solely on the basis of where they are from and what religion they practice.

The case, International Refugee Assistance Project, et al. v. Donald Trump, et al., is being argued in conjunction with two related cases, Iranian Alliances Across Borders v. Trump and Zakzok v. Trump, and was brought by the National Immigration Law Center and the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of the International Refugee Assistance Project, HIAS, the Middle East Studies Association, and others.

Max Wolson, staff attorney at the National Immigration Law Center, issued the following statement:

“Today, we argued to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals that the Muslim ban is a policy derived from hate and that this case more than meets the legal requirements to proceed to discovery. The administration’s Muslim ban has proven to be the foundation on which the administration built each additional attack on immigrants and communities of color. Since it was announced in the first week of Trump’s presidency, the Muslim ban has become just one part of a long list of shameful policies with the same goal of making life difficult for low-income communities of color.

“The issues in this case have implications far beyond the direct impact of the ban, which has had devastating consequences for people who are separated from loved ones and forced to miss family milestones. This administration’s anti-immigrant policies are a direct affront to the values we have aspired to since our nation’s founding. We will continue to fight to ensure that all people — regardless of where they were born, the color of their skin, what they earn, or how they pray — can live freely and be treated fairly in this country.”

###

The Latest
Entering Trump’s Second Term, Let’s Heed this Call from Dr. King

Entering Trump’s Second Term, Let’s Heed this Call from Dr. King

Sheila Miller

Jan 17, 2025 On January 20, 2025, we commemorate civil rights leader Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. The date coincides with the presidential inauguration of Donald Trump.

Know Your Rights: What to Do if You Are Arrested or Detained by Immigration

Know Your Rights: What to Do if You Are Arrested or Detained by Immigration

Jan 15, 2025 This Know Your Rights resource provides general information on what to do if you are stopped, arrested, or detained by immigration or other law enforcement. Originally published in December...

5 cosas que debes saber sobre la Ley Laken Riley

5 cosas que debes saber sobre la Ley Laken Riley

Heidi Altman

Jan 10, 2025 El proyecto de ley Laken Riley no es una medida de seguridad pública, sino más bien un ataque a las protecciones constitucionales establecidas que no contribuiría nada a la seguridad de las comunidades si se promulgara como...

Five Things to Know about the Laken Riley Act

Five Things to Know about the Laken Riley Act

Heidi Altman

Jan 6, 2025 The Laken Riley Act exploits personal tragedy to fuel anti-immigrant rhetoric. This bill is not a public safety measure, but rather an attack on established constitutional protections that would do nothing to keep communities safe if enacted...