FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 24, 2020
Boris Alvarado-Gonzalez, firstname.lastname@example.org, 516.838.0400
GROUPS FILE FOR EN BANC REVIEW OF MUSLIM BAN CHALLENGE, VOW TO KEEP FIGHTING
(Richmond, MD) – Today, the groups behind IRAP v. Trump, the challenge to the President’s Muslim ban executive order that bars people from certain Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States, filed for a rehearing en banc in response to a federal court decision in June, which reversed the district court decision that had allowed the case to continue.
The International Refugee Assistance Project (IRAP), American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of Maryland, and National Immigration Law Center are challenging the ban on behalf of HIAS, IRAP, the Middle East Studies Association, Yemeni American Merchants Association, and the Arab American Association of New York. The case has been consolidated with two other challenges of the ban.
The ban was blocked multiple times by the courts, but was allowed to take effect after the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government at the preliminary stage in another case challenging the ban. IRAP v. Trump was then remanded to the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, which agreed with plaintiffs that the lawsuit should be permitted to continue given the allegations of discrimination behind the ban.
Plaintiffs have now asked the Fourth Circuit to hear the argument en banc.
“This harmful and discriminatory policy is hurting Muslim families every day by keeping them apart,” said Justin Cox, senior supervising attorney at the litigation department of the International Refugee Assistance Project (IRAP). “We will continue our fight to prove that this policy is illegal and inconsistent with the fundamental values of our Constitution.”
“The Trump administration’s Muslim Ban was its original and longest-standing family separation policy,” said Max Wolson, a staff attorney at the National Immigration Law Center (NILC). “While the recent passage of the No Ban Act in the U.S. House of Representatives was a crucial step towards undoing the tremendous harm it has inflicted, we stand resolved to continue demonstrating that this policy is unlawful under current law and antithetical to the values of a just nation.”
Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project:“Anyone willing to engage with the facts —instead of hiding behind legal fictions —knows that the Muslim ban is the expression and product of President Trump’s hostility towards Islam and Muslims. The plaintiffs in this case deserve a chance to develop those facts in court and finally put an end to this shameful, discriminatory policy.”
To view the press release, click here.
The court filing can be accessed here.