Over the course of the past few weeks, President Donald Trump’s immigration ban has caused confusion at airports and heavy protests in the nation’s major cities. During this short period of time, businesses and organizations in Massachusetts have emphasized that such a travel ban could significantly impact their operations in negative ways.
On Jan. 31, Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey and a number of local companies and institutions filed a lawsuit. The concerned organizations claim that not only have the organizations themselves been affected by this executive order signed by the president in his first week after having taken office, but that a number of their employees have as well. The group of involved institutions include the University of Massachusetts, TripAdvisor, UMass Medical School, the tech firm Nano-C, and the Boston Architectural College.
Massachusetts is one of several states in the US that wants to legally challenge Trump’s executive order. Washington, New York, and Virginia have put forward similar efforts to put a halt to the immigration ban that is affecting people from the seven banned countries in the Middle East and Northern Africa with a Muslim majority.
The complaint that was submitted to the federal court explained that over 500 employees working in Massachusetts have already been affected by the immigration ban, and are experiencing enormous difficulties entering and/or re-entering the country. As a result, companies are facing problems in regards to staffing and maintaining their level of operations.
In an official press release, the office of Attorney General Healey criticised the executive order and claims that it “violates federal law,” and needs “to be declared unconstitutional – for taking the rights away from lawful residents as well as other visa holders without due process.”
The complaints also included statements of support from a number of representatives from the affected institutions, as well as from elected officials. For example, Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker was among those taking a stance, saying that “Massachusetts is a global community, and we all benefit from the shared experiences of our partners from around the world to support our economy and educational institutions to make our state the best place to live, work and raise a family.”
The president of the UMass system, Marty Meehan, provided his support for the General Attorney’s actions, and pointed out that “The UMass community firmly believes that this executive order is destructive to our interests and to our mission, which is why I support this complaint seeking to protect the economic, educational and cultural interests of the university and the Commonwealth as a whole.”
After almost two weeks of public outrage and protests, courts are taking legal action. Individual judges are putting the ban temporarily on hold, and a federal appeals court in San Francisco has decided to rule against the continuation of the immigration ban and to block Trump’s recent executive order. This rule started on Feb. 9. The three judges of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals came to this ruling unanimously in a 3-0 vote.
In the days before the ruling, Trump’s administration tried to convince the judges to lift the temporary block on the ban that was issued earlier, citing national security as their reasoning for the ban in the first place. In their 29-page order, the court states that “there is no precedent to support this claimed nonreviewability, which runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy.”
President Trump reacted to this ruling by expressing his disapproval and tweeting, “SEE YOU IN COURT.”