Donald Trump’s Muslim ban is back in court Monday, with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in Seattle hearing “arguments about how broadly the ban can be implemented while both sides await a decision” from the Supreme Court, which is scheduled to take on the case in about six weeks. As Politico reports, “the 9th Circuit arguments are expected to center on which refugees are exempt from the ban”:
The dispute to be aired Monday is over orders the Supreme Court issued in June and July outlining who would and would not get a short-term reprieve from Trump's halt on immigration from six majority-Muslim countries and his ban on admission of refugees from across the globe.
“This will be the most important interpretation yet of what the Supreme Court said on June 26th,” said University of Texas law professor Stephen Vladeck.
The Supreme Court’s June order declared that Trump's directive couldn't be enforced, for now, against people with a "bona fide relationship" with a U.S. person or entity. Hawaii-based U.S. District Court Judge Derrick Watson ruled last month that the Trump administration was interpreting that exemption too narrowly by excluding people whose relatives in the U.S. are grandparents or cousins.
Critics of the bigoted ban dubbed it the “Grandma ban.” Melanie Nezer of refugee group HIAS said, “Refugees—that really seems to be where the arguments are and where most of the focus will be.”
It’s important to remember the real people affected by Trump’s xenophobic executive order, like Tianna and Todd Rooney.
Earlier this year they made the decision to open their home to “K,” a 16-year-old refugee. But instead of beginning his new life, “K” was blocked from entering the United States and is “living in a refugee camp in Egypt by himself.” Court actions from the next few weeks could dictate the rest of his life:
We have been following the legal ping-pong around the travel ban for months, but we still don’t understand why the government is trying so hard to keep K. away from us. This policy has been designed, as many of the actions coming out of the Trump presidency, to villainize incredibly vulnerable populations. Over and over, Trump has attempted to convince U.S. citizens that refugees should be feared — however, as is typical of our president, there is simply no data to support this. This month, yet another court will have to make a decision directly affecting our family’s future. We are hoping for the best, but now sadly are always prepared for the worst.
What brings us joy is that mid-August we have welcomed another refugee child, our son Tesfalem, into our home and family. Tesfalem was fortunate to have arrived in the United States in February while the travel ban was still blocked. The experience has been everything we have hoped it to be, except that we wish that his brother could be with us also. Our family’s grief has been unexpected and deep. I did not imagine my children would have to experience these circumstances and emotions at their tender ages.
“Now every time we get a call from the resettlement agency, our hearts skip a beat because we hope it is the call we have been waiting for for so long,” they write. “In the meantime, K’s room remains empty—but our kids are drawing ‘Welcome Home’ signs, just in case.”