Tacoma nonprofit fighting for refugees now taking aim at Trump’s travel ban

A Tacoma-based nonprofit and other aid groups fighting President Donald Trump’s temporary suspension of refugees entering the United States are pushing back against the president’s travel ban for also limiting the number of admissions.

After Lutheran Community Services Northwest (LCSNW) and others sued the Trump administration in February, a U.S. District judge in Seattle temporarily blocked Trump’s effort to suspend the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), which is a legal pathway for individuals fleeing persecution and violence.

Judge Jamal Whitehead’s preliminary injunction, which is pending appeal by the government, has since been narrowed to focus on 160 refugees he ordered in May to be immediately admitted into the country. Other refugees are expected to be addressed on a case-by-case basis, court records show.

Separately, a Trump proclamation last month fully or partially banned residents of 19 countries from entering the United States, citing threats to national security.

The travel ban is being applied to refugees, including those protected under the federal court’s preliminary injunction, according to court records and attorneys for the government, refugee aid groups and refugees.

Eighty of the current 160 injunction-protected refugees are nationals of banned countries, according to a July 1 court filing by government attorneys. Seventy other refugees have been admitted to the United States or were ready for departure but awaiting exit permits or flight booking, court records show.

Attorneys representing the plaintiffs in the lawsuit asked Whitehead on Monday to formally address the travel ban’s effect on the preliminary injunction, arguing that the ban shouldn’t apply to refugees nor impact the court’s ability to enforce its existing order.

“The June 4 travel ban is the latest obstacle that defendants have manufactured to avoid compliance with the preliminary injunction,” attorney Jonathan Hawley said during an emergency hearing.

Whitehead declined to make a ruling Monday but said one would come by the end of the week.

“If the June 4 proclamation is a valid indication of the president’s authority,” Whitehead asked, “does the court have the power to order the government to continue processing and admitting injunction-protected refugees who fall on the list of countries that are covered by the proclamation?”

The travel ban was one of a handful of issues on Monday in a debate about which refugees were protected by the preliminary injunction. Both sides also argued the impact of the Supreme Court’s ruling last month limiting nationwide injunctions.

Hawley and other legal counsel representing the plaintiffs requested the hearing amid their concerns that the government was trying to vastly shrink the pool of refugees who potentially could be resettled into the United States while the preliminary injunction is in place.

There were roughly 12,000 refugees who had “arranged and confirmable travel plans” as of Jan. 20 when Trump signed the executive order, according to a court filing in May.

The federal court accepted the government’s figure of 160 refugees as protected by the injunction, representing those who had travel plans within two weeks of the executive order and also met criteria set forth by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which weighed in on eligibility in May. That same month, Whitehead issued an order notifying that he intended to appoint a special master to assist in conducting case-by-case determinations for other refugee applicants.

David Kim, senior litigation counsel for the Department of Justice, acknowledged Monday that the travel ban could have “a practical effect” on the government’s ability to comply with the preliminary injunction.

“But that’s not to say that the government has brought its implementation of this court’s order to a screeching halt,” he said. “It absolutely has not done that.”

Refugees on the Trump administration’s list of banned countries may be considered case by case, Kim said, adding that the government was neither disregarding the preliminary injunction nor the travel ban.

“We are trying our best to comply with both,” he said.

Meanwhile, LCSNW, which is an affiliate of a national resettlement agency, could provide care for a limited number of new refugees in the coming weeks, according to a spokesperson.