A federal judge in Seattle on Tuesday blocked President Donald Trump’s executive order pausing the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, siding with arguments that the order likely exceeded the president’s authority.
“The president has substantial discretion to suspend refugee admissions. But that authority is not limitless,” U.S. District Judge Jamal Whitehead said in his decision. “He cannot ignore Congress’ detailed framework for refugee admissions and the limits it places on the president’s ability to suspend the same.”
Between the halt in admissions, staff layoffs at refugee agencies and the indefinite suspension of family reunification, Whitehead said there appeared to be an “effective nullification of congressional will.” Further, he said, the implementation of the order “likely violates bedrock principles of administrative law.”
He said an injunction was needed because “our system of separated powers demands no less.”
The Justice Department and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs had urged the judge to take swift action because the president’s order, issued on his first day back in office, had left their clients in danger.
“Like Humpty Dumpty falling off the brick wall, pieces are being broken that will not be put together by immediate relief,” plaintiff attorney Deepa Alagesan told the judge, adding that she was not arguing against Trump’s order, but challenging the agencies who enforced it and froze the funding.
Their suit contended that the refugee suspension, including its implementation by federal agencies, is unlawful because it violates Congress’ authority to make immigration laws. It also argued that the State Department’s stop-work orders violate “basic regulatory requirements.”
In court filings, the Justice Department maintained that Trump was “acting pursuant to his statutory and constitutional authority to make determinations regarding national security and the admission of aliens.”
During the hearing, Whitehead listed off several claims by the plaintiffs, including refugees being separated from their families and others being stuck in processing limbo for months and months. “Aren’t these textbook examples of harms that can’t be undone with money damages?” he asked.
August Flentje, arguing for the DOJ, urged the judge to issue a narrow injunction involving only the plaintiffs in the case if he ruled against them. “It has to go to only those individuals who have made out a case for irreparable harm,” including one plaintiff from Iraq, Flentje said.
The plaintiffs contended that a “comprehensive injunction is the only way to redress the proven irreparable harms Plaintiffs face.”
Whitehead said a detailed written order would be forthcoming.
The suit was brought by community groups and a number of refugees who were affected by the order, including people in Iraq and Afghanistan.
One of the plaintiffs, identified only as Pacito in the complaint, is a refugee from the Democratic Republic of the Congo who was scheduled to come to the U.S. less than 48 hours after Trump’s order. He “was scheduled to travel on January 22 with his wife and baby and had sold all of the family’s possessions and given up their rental house in preparation; he then learned that their travel was canceled,” the suit said.
Trump’s order said the move to shut down the program was necessary because the U.S. “lacks the ability to absorb large numbers of migrants, and in particular, refugees, into its communities in a manner that does not compromise the availability of resources for Americans, that protects their safety and security, and that ensures the appropriate assimilation of refugees.”
Trump said he was suspending the refugee admission program “until such time as the further entry into the United States of refugees aligns with the interests of the United States.”
