Friday hearing for state challenge to Trump’s immigration order

State Attorney General Bob Ferguson on Thursday announced the filing of an amended complaint in State of Washington v. Trump, the state’s lawsuit challenging key sections of President Trump’s immigration executive order as illegal and unconstitutional.

The amended complaint filed late Wednesday in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, adds the state of Minnesota as a plaintiff, under the leadership of Attorney General Lori Swanson, according to a Washington State Attorney’s Office media release. Ferguson’s office also filed a supplemental brief addressing Washington’s standing to bring the action.

Senior Judge James Robart will hold a hearing Friday, Feb. 3, on the state’s motion for temporary restraining order (TRO). Attorneys for the state of Washington and the federal government will present argument on whether implementation of the Trump Administration’s executive order should be suspended nationwide immediately.

The court could rule on the TRO as early as the conclusion of the hearing, set for 2:30 p.m. in the United States Courthouse in Seattle.

“No one is above the law, not even the president,” said Ferguson in the release. “My legal team presents a strong case, detailing the constitutional weaknesses in President Trump’s unlawful executive order. That order is causing significant harm and demands immediate action.”

On Monday, Washington filed the first state lawsuit challenging the Administration’s move to restrict immigration from seven majority-Muslim nations and the resettlement of refugees. In addition to this action from Washington, now joined by Minnesota, three other states — Massachusetts, New York and Virginia — have moved to join third-party actions challenging the federal policy.

To obtain a TRO, the state must prove that its underlying lawsuit is likely to succeed, that irreparable harm is likely to occur without the restraining order, and that halting the president’s order immediately is in the public interest. The state must also establish that the potential injury to Washington residents caused by leaving the president’s order in place outweighs any potential damage from halting it.

More in News

Washington Women’s Mayoral Forum to discuss city sustainability priorities

Ralph, Backus join other mayors, Gov. Inslee to share top initiatives at GoGreen Conference on April 4

New ramp configuration coming to I-405 interchange

For the Reporter Drivers who use the southbound Interstate 405 ramp to… Continue reading

Appeals court agrees with AG opinion on local marijuana bans

Jurisdictions, including Kent, can ban marijuana sales under state law

Fire damages Kent senior living complex

No injuries in Tuesday East Hill fire

Kent’s durable, new surface – for all to play

City, community and sports leaders welcome synthetic turf at Hogan Park | PHOTOS

Solemn service at Auburn’s Vietnam War Memorial groundbreaking

Alliance, city leaders, veterans welcome planned shrine at Les Gove Park

Kent seniors walk out to honor the 17 killed at Florida high school

Residents of The Inn at Arbor Village joined the National Student Walkout… Continue reading

Most Read