IRAP is the named plaintiff in IRAP v. Trump, the first lawsuit to challenge both President Trump’s original and revised Executive Orders in their entirety. The complaint states that the order discriminates against Muslims because of their religion and is thus unconstitutional. The lawsuit was filed by IRAP, HIAS, the Middle East Studies Association (MESA), and individual plaintiffs. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the National Immigration Law Center (NILC) are acting as co-counsel.
On June 26, 2017, the United States Supreme Court decided to review the case, however, canceled October oral arguments after the President signed a new Proclamation on September 24 which restricted travel from eight, majority Muslim, countries. On October 17, Hawaii Federal Judge Derrick Watson granted motion for a temporary restraining order, which blocked the newest Proclamation from taking effect. After subsequent oral arguments at the Maryland District Court, in response to an amended complaint filed by IRAP, the ACLU, and the National Immigration Law Center (NILC), Judge Theodore Chuang ruled in favor of a partial preliminary injunction, providing relief to thousands who would’ve been affected by these sweeping, discriminatory travel restrictions. On February 15, 2018, the Fourth Circuit en banc affirmed the injunction.
However, on June 26, 2018, the Supreme Court in Trump v. Hawai’i, which also challenged the new Proclamation, allowed the Proclamation to take effect and found that plaintiffs are not entitled to preliminary relief. Following that decision, IRAP v. Trump was remanded to the district court. The district court found that the case should proceed to discovery and the government has appealed that decision.
View the press release: GROUPS FILE NEW CHALLENGE TO TRUMP MUSLIM BAN Press Release Feb 7 2017
View the February 7, 2017 complaint: IRAP_v_Trump_Complaint
View the October 17, 2017 preliminary injunction: Order Granting Plaintiffs Motion for a Preliminary Injunction
View the February 15, 2018 Fourth Circuit decision: Order Affirming Motion for Preliminary Injunction
View the May 2, 2019 decision denying the motion to dismiss: Memorandum Opinion