National media flocked to Richmond yesterday, where the latest courtroom challenge to President Donald Trump’s travel ban took place. 13 judges of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals were weighing whether the executive order affecting six predominantly Muslim countries is constitutional.
In an unusual move, the court decided to broadcast the trial live via C-SPAN.They also skipped the initial step of having the case heard by a panel of just three judges. Both choices were an indication of the issue's importance, and the public interest in the case.
Now, the big question facing judges is whether they should take the executive order at face value, as an action intended to safeguard Americans from potential terrorists, or use President Trump’s words to interpret the order as something different: an attempt to ban Muslims from entering the country.
Judge James Wynn pushed back against the administration’s argument that the only rightful thing to consider is the text of the document.
“Don’t we get to consider what was actually said here, and said very explicitly, even after the second order there was sort of a wink and a nod, that well ‘You know what I mean?” asked Judge Wynn of acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall.
But Wall argued it’s not the court’s role to perform a psycho-analysis on the president, and doing so would set a dangerous precedent.
Judge Dennis Shedd asked if the executive was not entitled to some deference by the court.
Omar Jadwat, attorney for the ACLU, responded promptly that deference isn’t a license to violate the Constitution.
Along with New York, Minnesota and others, Virginia’s attorney general filed a brief in the case. They argued the travel ban has a negative effect on the state’s economy, and would harm international students and permanent residents.
Although those arguments didn’t come up in court, many Virginians showed up outside to show solidarity and echo those ideas.
“There’s never been a case like this, never in our history would the President of the United States so nakedly try to go after, try to single out, a single religion for condemnation,” said Jadwat outside afterwards. “To say to so many people: You are not welcome here.”
A ruling isn’t expected right away. The outcome is likely to be appealed to the Supreme Court.