Maryland To Join Lawsuit Opposing Trump Travel Ban

BALTIMORE, MD — Attorney General Brian Frosh announced Friday that Maryland will join Washington state's lawsuit opposing Trump's new immigration ban.

As of Monday, March 13, Maryland will join other states to oppose the travel ban.

Frosh issued the following statement:

President Trump’s second executive order is still a Muslim ban. The Administration persists in an effort to implement a policy that is inhumane and unconstitutional, but also makes us less safe, not more safe. It makes us less competitive and sends a message to the most talented academics, scientists and engineers around the world that they are not welcome. It will harm Maryland’s universities and our economy. It is unwise, illegal and un-American.

According to CNN, Washington state asked a federal judge Thursday to block Trump's new travel ban. Washington state's attorney general Bob Ferguson said the ban still has legal flaws, and "purports to reinstate two provisions of the prior order."

The state said Trump's "own senior advisers," such as White House press secretary Sean Spicer and senior policy adviser Stephen Miller, said "the principles of the executive order remain the same," and that the new travel ban only addresses "very technical issues" to achieve "the same basic policy outcome."

The Trump administration announced a revised immigration ban Monday to replace its previous executive order that was suspended by the courts. The first order, which banned immigration to the U.S. by citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries, quickly drew criticism and protests while causing chaos at airports as soon as it was implemented.

The new order officially revokes the first, though the administration continues to insist that it was legally sound. The new ban is effective beginning March 16.

The new ban does not include Iraq in the list of targeted countries. Citizens from Iran, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen will still be barred from coming to the United States for 90 days.

Syrian refugees, who were indefinitely refused entry under the initial executive order, will now be treated the same as all other refugees. The new order will pause all refugee admissions for 120 days.

The new order also directs Homeland Security and the Justice Department to release public data on crimes committed in the U.S. by citizens of other countries, including "information regarding the number and types of acts of gender-based violence against women, including so-called 'honor killings,' in the United States by foreign nationals."

It also provides an defense of the first executive order, which many criticized as a "Muslim ban," which President Trump had campaigned on. The text says the first ban "did not provide a basis for discriminating for or against members of any particular religion."

It continues: "That order was not motivated by animus toward any religion, but was instead intended to protect the ability of religious minorities -- whoever they are and wherever they reside."

Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Attorney General Jeff Sessions discussed the new order on live TV Monday morning.

The officials refused to answer questions after they gave their prepared statements. One reported asked whether the new order was an admission that the rollout of the first order was handled badly, but she received no response.

In his statement, Tillerson called the order "a vital measure for protecting the country."

Sessions said, "This executive order seeks to protect the American people as well as lawful immigrants."

This time, the executive order will not apply to lawful permanent residents or people who have already received visas as the initial order did. The first order was not clear on the status of these individuals. The White House gave contradictory guidance about whether or not green card holders would face new restrictions, which became a key focus of the legal challenges to the order.

By asking three of his Cabinet appointees to jointly announce the new order, the White House sent the signal that their departments all had the opportunity to weigh in on the policy. This interdepartmental buy-in was rumored to be lacking for the first order. The details of the new policy were given to the press before the announcement.

Senior adviser to the president Stephen Miller said Feb. 21 on Fox News that the new executive order would "have the same basic policy outcome" as the first directive.

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman indicated he may challenge the new order.

"While the White House may have made changes to the ban, the intent to discriminate against Muslims remains clear," he said in a statement. "My office is closely reviewing the new executive order, and I stand ready to litigate -- again -- in order to protect New York's families institutions and economy."

Rep. Elijah Cummings, a Maryland Democrat, released a statement criticizing the new order.

"Following a series of defeats in court for his first un-American Muslim ban, President Trump is attempting to revise his unconstitutional policy," Cummings said. "But the American people should not be fooled by the President’s second attempt: his policy still bans immigrants only from Muslim-majority countries, it still cruelly blocks refugees, it is still un-American, and it still will harm American national security interests more than help them.”

Bernie Sanders also denounce the revised ban on Twitter. "This isn’t about keeping America safe. Let’s call it what it is," he wrote. "This ban is a racist and anti-Islamic attempt to divide us up."

According to the Washington Post, Iraqi officials called the new ban an "important step in the right direction."

Additional reporting by Patch Writer Cody Fenwick

Photo: Daniel Arauz/Flickr