Thursday, March 16, 2017
5 Judges In 9th Circuit Would Uphold Trump's First Travel Ban
Last month, a 3-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to stay the Washington federal district court's temporary restraining order against enforcement of President Trump's first "travel ban" Executive Order. (See prior posting.) On March 8, after the President issued a narrower and more focused new Executive Order, a 3-judge panel of the 9th Circuit granted the government's unopposed motion to dismiss its underlying appeal of the district court's decision, leaving the case pending at the district court level. A judge of the 9th Circuit then called for a vote on en banc reconsideration of the order to dismiss in order to vacate the panel's original opinion upholding the district court's stay. In State of Washington v. Trump, (9th Cir., March 15, 2017), reconsideration failed to receive a majority vote. However five judges (Judges Bybee, Kozinski, Callahan, Bea, and Ikuta) filed a dissenting opinion, criticizing the panel's original rationale for upholding the stay. The dissenters focused on the Supreme Court's decision in Kleindienst v. Mandel (1972) relating to the deference which courts should give to executive action affecting aliens who are outside the U.S. CNN points out that the five dissenters were all appointed by Republican presidents.