A federal appeals court panel last week declined the Trump administration’s request to reinstate its executive order temporarily barring U.S. entry for individuals from seven countries, citing disruption in higher education among other factors.
The three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, in San Francisco, unanimously rejected the administration’s request for a stay of a federal district court’s temporary restraining order that enjoined enforcement of key sections of the Jan. 27 executive order signed by President Donald Trump.
Citing the potential for terrorism, the order barred for 90 days entry for those from Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. The two other blocked sections deal with refugees. The executive order created widespread disruption in immigration and was met with protests.
Washington state, joined by Minnesota, sued the Trump administration to block the order on due-process and religious-discrimination grounds.
The 9th Circuit’s Feb. 9 opinion, issued jointly by the three judges, relies on the states’ arguments about the executive order’s impact on universities and foreign students.
“The interests of the states’ universities here are aligned with their students,” says the opinion in State of Washington v. Trump. “The students’ educational success is inextricably bound up in the universities’ capacity to teach them. And the universities’ reputations depend on the success of their professors’ research.”
The president’s executive order has alarmed many in K-12 education, especially in communities with large numbers of refugees or immigrants from the countries cited in the order.
The 9th Circuit court panel found that the states had a likelihood of prevailing on their claim that the provisions of the executive order violated the constitutional guarantee of procedural due process.
Trump reacted on Twitter soon after the ruling: “SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!” The U.S. Department of Justice said it was “reviewing the decision and considering its options.”
A version of this article appeared in the February 15, 2017 edition of Education Week as Impact on Universities Cited in 9th Circuit Travel-Ban Ruling