MADIGAN & 16 ATTORNEYS GENERAL FILE AMICUS BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF HAWAII'S LAWSUIT AGAINST REVISED IMMIGRATION BAN
Illinois Leads Coalition of AGs in Supporting Hawaii's Motion Blocking Revised Travel Ban
Chicago — Attorney General Lisa Madigan today led a coalition of attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit supporting the preliminary injunction obtained by the state of Hawaii, which bars enforcement of the revised Executive Order on immigration issued in March.
Madigan and the attorneys general argue the revised travel ban retains unconstitutional components of the original order, including a broad ban on entry to the country by nationals of several predominantly Muslim countries and a complete suspension of the refugee program.
"The changes to the travel ban do not change the fact that the intent of this executive action was always discriminatory," Madigan said. "I filed this brief today to protect the residents of Illinois, our educational institutions and employers from the harm caused by this executive action."
In the brief filed today, the states argue the Executive Order has caused serious harm to individuals who live, work, and study in their states, as well as their families, communities, and the institutions and businesses that employ and educate them.
In part, the brief states:
"While the amici States differ in many ways, all of us welcome and benefit from immigration, tourism, and international student and business travel, and all of us will face concrete and immediate harms flowing directly from the revised Order if it is not enjoined. The harms detailed in this brief exemplify, on a nationwide scale, the injuries that form the basis for state standing to challenge the revised Order in this and other pending litigation, and demonstrate the widespread and irreparable harms that the States would suffer if this Court were to reverse the grant of a preliminary injunction or issue a stay pending appeal."
The amicus brief highlights that the initial Executive Order has already caused concrete irreparable harm to the states' residents, institutions and businesses, and the revised version will continue to harm the states. Specifically, the states argue that the order harms state colleges and universities by creating staffing gaps, precluding students' attendance, and imposing additional costs and administrative burdens; disrupts staffing and research at state medical institutions; and reduces tax revenues and broadly harms the states' economies.
Joining Madigan in filing the amicus brief are the attorneys general from California, Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and Washington, and the District of Columbia.
The full amicus brief is available here.
Attorneys general have been at the forefront of the opposition to the executive action on immigration. Madigan condemned the initial Executive Order as unconstitutional, unlawful and un-American and filed amicus briefs in support of previous legal challenges to that order brought by Washington, Virginia and New York, as well as supporting Hawaii's challenge to the revised executive action.
In February, Madigan held a summit with local civil rights leaders on immigration and hate crimes in light of the federal executive actions on immigration. She also issued a letter to Illinois Governor Rauner asking his administration to fight the immigration ban Executive Order and protect Illinois immigrants and refugees from discrimination and hate crimes and to oppose a separate Executive Order stating that sanctuary jurisdictions are not eligible to receive certain federal grants. Madigan sent Governor Rauner a separate letter urging him to reinstate Illinois' Hate Crimes Commission. As immigrants and refugees seek out information and help in response to the Executive Orders, Madigan has provided guidance about scam artists and unscrupulous immigration services providers possibly posing unlawfully as lawyers or demanding excessive upfront fees for assistance.