majority countries in a bid to keep its legal battle alive.
The amendment appears intended to avoid the administration's legal case
at the U.S. Supreme Court becoming moot on grounds that parts of the executive
order have expired.
Challengers to the ban have said in court papers that it should expire on
Wednesday, 90 days after the executive order was due to take effect on March
16.
A memo issued by the White House, as the Supreme Court considered two
challenges to the ban, said parts of the order put on hold would not expire
before they can go into effect, and the start date would be when court injunctions
were lifted.
The move is part of administration efforts to have the high court rule
that the controversial ban should immediately go into effect after Trump's
first attempts to impose travel restrictions were blocked by lower courts.
Lawsuits by Hawaii and Maryland challengers argued the order violated
federal immigration law and a section of the Constitution's First Amendment,
which prohibits the government favoring or disfavoring any particular religion.
The Trump administration has said it is needed to protect national security.
Soon after the memo was issued, Acting Solicitor General Jeff Wall filed
court papers saying that it resolved "any doubt" about the effective
date of the order.
If the case was moot, the nine justices would have no reason to rule on
it and lower court rulings against the administration would remain in place.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday gave the Trump administration more time to
file papers responding to an appeals court ruling on Monday that upheld a block
on the travel ban.
The court's action likely delayed any decision on administration requests
for the ban to go into effect until at least next week.
Federal judges in Maryland and Hawaii blocked Trump's 90-day ban on
travelers from Libya, Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. The Hawaii judge
also blocked a 120-day ban on refugees entering the United States.
The 9th Circuit largely upheld the Hawaii injunction on Monday.
In the second case, the Richmond, Virginia-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court
of Appeals, on May 25 upheld the Maryland judge's ruling.
0 Comments