// 10/1/17 //
The Supreme Court cancelled oral arguments in the revised travel ban case and asked parties to brief whether the new ban, issued over the weekend, renders the case moot (WSJ; Politico; The Hill).
- The Supreme Court’s order is available here.
- The SG had filed a letter at the Supreme Court proposing additional briefs in light of the President's new ban.
- The cases against the revised travel ban are probably moot, writes Marty Lederman on Take Care.
- The government and courts have shown that the justifications for the expired travel ban were easily discredited, writes Leah Litman for Take Care.
- Lawrence Hurley at Reuters analyzes these developments.
The Trump administration instituted a new travel ban, creating restrictions that vary by country (NYT, WaPo).
- Administration officials have described the new regulations as “tough” but “tailored” (WaPo).
- At Just Security, Marty Lederman analyzes the new ban and associated legal questions.
- Lawfare outlines the details of Trump’s proclamation and provides an in-depth look at the rationale for the travel ban.
- Lawfare also explores how the travel ban is unlikely to have any practical effect on North Koreans traveling to the United States.
- Reuters discusses why the new travel ban order could be more difficult to challenge in court.
- The proclamation can withstand judicial scrutiny, argues Josh Blackman at Lawfare.
- The new travel ban is subject to many of the same legal challenges as the prior order, writes Ilya Somin at The Washington Post.
- The proclamation undermines the Immigration and Nationality Act, argues Peter Margulies at Lawfare.
- The countries targeted in the new travel ban “don’t have very much terrorism” (WaPo).
- It is too early to decide what the new travel ban says about Trump’s relationship with the judiciary, writes Joshua Geltzer at Just Security.
Senate Republicans released the Succeed Act, the replacement for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) (Politico).
- The back and forth on DACA is leaving young undocumented immigrants adrift (NYT).
- Frank Bruni highlights the intellectual contributions of immigrants (NYT).
- The lives of Dreamers who were deported under President Obama could provide a glimpse into the future for those currently covered by DACA (The Hill).