In continuing his efforts to fight President Donald Trump’s travel ban, Attorney General Mark Herring has filed an amicus brief before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Herring, along with Maryland Attorney General Brian E. Frosh, are leading a coalition of 17 state attorneys urging the court to reject the Trump administration’s request to reinstate the travel ban while it appeals a decision from the U.S. District Court for Maryland.
According to a release from AG Herring’s office, the brief, “International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump”, states that the President’s second executive order still “violates the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution.”
“The second, scaled-back version of President Trump’s travel ban still suffers from the same fatal flaws as the first,” said Attorney General Herring in the release. “The President simply cannot codify religious discrimination in an attempt to keep a campaign promise. The first ban and the looming threat of the second ban have already had a negative impact on our states, our residents, and our economies. Our coalition stands united in continuing to oppose the unconstitutional, unlawful, and deeply un-American ban. I thank all my colleagues, especially Attorney General Frosh, for joining in this effort.”
In addition to AG Herring and Frosh, the brief was co-written and supported by attorneys general of California, Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maine, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia.
In the brief, which you can read in full here, the states cite “irreparable harm” to residents and “overwhelming and unrebutted” evidence of anti-Muslim bias in urging the Court to continue to block President Trump’s unconstitutional travel ban.
AG Herring has been successful thus far in his fight against the ban. On Feb. 13, Judge Leonie Brinkema granted Attorney General Mark R. Herring’s motion for the nation’s first preliminary injunction to protect Virginia residents from the harm caused by the original ban.
In a statement soon after the judge’s decision, AG Herring called the ban “unlawful, unconstitutional and un-American”.
“The overwhelming evidence shows that this ban was conceived in religious bigotry and is actually making Americans and our armed forces less safe at home and abroad.”
Read more on that in RVA Mag’s story and interview with a Virginia college student impacted by Trump travel ban here.
In a powerful statement, the attorneys general lay out the repercussions in the brief should the ban go into effect:
“Letting the travel ban take effect would irreparably harm the Amici States. It would block entry by students, teachers, workers, and tourists from the six majority-Muslim countries. It would harm our citizens, lawful permanent residents, and resident visa holders, many of whom have family members and loved ones who would be presumptively denied entry. And it would amplify the message of fear and intimidation communicated to our Muslim communities by a President who has fulfilled his promise to single out Muslims for disfavored treatment.”