NILC Responds to Supreme Court Calendar Change in Trump v. IRAP

Sep 25, 2017

Enforcement Racial Justice

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 25, 2017

CONTACT
Hayley Burgess, 202-384-1279, [email protected]

NILC Responds to Supreme Court Calendar Change in Trump v. IRAP

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court has removed both major legal challenges to President Trump’s Muslim ban from its oral argument calendar, NILC learned today. Oral argument in the cases had been scheduled to take place on October 10.

The Court has ordered all parties in the cases to submit additional briefing in light of yesterday’s announcement from the Trump administration that it has issued yet another ban against several countries, including predominantly Muslim-majority countries. The National Immigration Law Center is co-counsel in Trump v. IRAP and has committed to fighting the Muslim ban in all its permutations every step of the way. Below is a statement from Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center.

“This new Muslim ban, just like each prior version of it, is morally reprehensible and legally indefensible. Our communities have always known this, and the federal circuit courts of appeal have consistently agreed. Although any delay in justice served is disappointing and will result in tremendous harm to our communities, this latest news is just one step in the larger, multi-faceted fight against the Muslim ban and the Islamophobia that is at the root of these bans. Our goal from the start has been clear: we will work—inside and outside the courtroom—to make sure there is no Muslim ban ever. We will collaborate with our Muslim community leaders and all the affected communities to make sure our country rejects this hateful and divisive policy.

“All those who joined us at the airports, in town halls, and in courtrooms over the last several months should stay engaged. Visit www.nomuslimbanever.com to learn how you can make your voice heard.”

# # #

Related
CLINIC v. Rubio

CLINIC v. Rubio

This lawsuit challenges the Trump administration’s sweeping suspension of immigrant visa processing for people from 75 countries.

Last update: Oct 1, 2026

CLINIC v. Rubio: The 75-Country Visa Pause Was Vacated. What Happens Now?

CLINIC v. Rubio: The 75-Country Visa Pause Was Vacated. What Happens Now?

Published Sep 30, 2026 A practical roadmap, created by CLINIC, for immigrant visa applicants and their legal representatives.

LGML v. Noem

LGML v. Noem

This lawsuit seeks to stop the Trump administration from unlawfully expelling hundreds of unaccompanied Guatemalan children from the United States.

Last update: Sep 21, 2026

How Anti-Black Racism Shapes Welfare Inequality for Immigrants

How Anti-Black Racism Shapes Welfare Inequality for Immigrants

Kat Lundie

Published Sep 18, 2026 Laws and policies throughout American history have consistently and systematically ensured that Black people and immigrants do not receive equal opportunities to escape poverty.