US Supreme Court Tag

We’re now on day 36 without a 4th Circuit decision on Trump's third travel order. Unveiled as a presidential proclamation on September 24, 2017, the third travel order (we'll call it EO-3) restricts entry by most nationals of Chad, Iran, Libya, Syria, and Yemen, as well as some nationals of North Korea and Venezuela.

When Trump rolled out a new Permanent Travel Order last night, I noted that there was a substantial question whether this rendered the pending Supreme Court case as to Trave Order No. 2 moot:

So what happens to the pending Supreme Court case? It seems that so much of the case as sought an injunction against Travel Order No. 2 is moot, meaning there’s nothing left to enjoin. I’d have to dig deeper into the pleadings to know if the entire case goes away, but it seems that much of it will.

The Supreme Court just posted an Order requesting briefing specifically on the question of mootness, and canceling the scheduled October 5 oral argument:

Yesterday Justice Kennedy issued a temporary stay of the 9th Circuit's ruling as to refugees, whose entry is put on hold under the Trump Travel Order No. 2. Today the full Supreme Court granted the stay:

The application for stay of mandate presented to Justice Kennedy and by him referred to the Court is granted, and the issuance of the mandate of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in case No. 17-16426 is stayed with respect to refugees covered by a formal assurance, pending further order of this Court.

The State of Hawaii and the Trump administration have jointly requested that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals expedite consideration of the Trump administration's request for a stay of a Hawaii District Court preliminary injunction that significantly curtailed the implementation of Travel Order No. 2. The request comes just days after the Supreme Court ruled on the Trump administration's request for "clarification" and a stay. The Supreme Court denied the request for “clarification,” granted a stay of the Hawaii Order on refugees, and was silent (de facto denial) of a stay as to relatives:

The Supreme Court has ruled on the Trump administration's Motion for Clarification and for a Stay of the Hawaii Order significantly scaling back implementation of Travel Order No. 2. The Court denied the request for "clarification," granted a stay of the Hawaii Order on refugees, and was silent (de facto denial) of a stay as to relatives:

Hawaii just filed its Opposition (pdf.) to the Trump administration's request for clarification of the Supreme Court's prior ruling as to Travel Order No. 2, and to stay the Hawaii federal District Court's Order significantly scaling back the Trump administration's interpretation of the Supreme Court ruling. A full copy of the Opposition papers is embedded at the bottom of this post. We covered the issues in our prior post, Trump asks Supreme Court halt Hawaii Court ruling on Travel Order:

In the ongoing saga over the lower federal courts' attempt to usurp presidential power over who may enter the country, the Trump administration late last night filed a request for the Supreme Court to review and to halt the Hawaii federal court order that dramatically scaled back Trump's Travel Order No. 2. As described in our post about the Hawaii Order, we noted that those exempted from the Order extend far beyond the "close familial" relations as described in the prior Supreme Court ruling which substantially overruled the Hawaii Court's prior preliminary injunction. Those exempted, according to the Hawaii federal court, include: