Tacoma refugee-aid group scores a victory against Trump administration

The Trump administration cannot use its travel ban as the basis for denying refugees entry into the United States, according to a federal judge’s ruling this week in a lawsuit filed by a Tacoma nonprofit and others challenging the suspension of the nation’s refugee-resettlement program.

Judge Jamal Whitehead issued the order Monday in federal court in Seattle to clarify that refugees eligible for protection under a prior court action that temporarily blocked President Donald Trump’s move to suspend the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP).

Whitehead’s ruling means that the government must immediately resume processing for 80 refugees being denied entry as nationals from among a dozen countries whose residents last month were banned from traveling to the United States by a Trump proclamation. The government also must review the cases of other refugees from banned countries to determine their eligibility, the judge’s order said.

Mevlüde Akay Alp, senior staff attorney at the International Refugee Assistance Project, said in a statement Tuesday that Whitehead’s order “affirmed the urgent need for relief from the Trump administration’s unlawful suspension of the refugee program.” Alp’s organization is representing plaintiffs in the lawsuit.

“The court ruled that the travel ban did not excuse the government from processing and admitting refugees, rejecting the government’s latest attempts to undermine the injunction,” Alp said.

A State Department spokesperson declined to comment Tuesday, citing the agency’s general practice regarding ongoing litigation. Many refugees await travel

Trump issued an executive order on Jan. 20 that suspended refugee admissions under USRAP, the country’s legal pathway to enter the United States for individuals fleeing persecution and violence in their home countries, citing record migration over the past four years and concerns of U.S. interests. The order allowed for case-by-case reviews and called for 90-day assessments to determine whether resuming the program was appropriate.

Whitehead, who’s presiding over the lawsuit, issued in February a preliminary injunction that temporarily blocked Trump’s executive order. Since then, the government has appealed, and the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals largely paused the injunction but preserved protection for individuals who met certain criteria, court records show. The appellate court has said the president’s broad authority over who can enter the country meant that the Trump administration was likely to win the case, according to the Associated Press.

In essence, Whitehead’s ruling Monday defined whom among thousands of refugees already approved and booked for travel might be covered by the injunction, a week after a hearing in the lawsuit in which the plaintiffs and the government argued over issues of the scope.

There were 12,000 vetted individuals ready for travel when Trump issued the executive order, but just 160 people with travel scheduled within two weeks of the USRAP suspension were identified as injunction-protected refugees leading into Monday, court records show. While 70 had been admitted or were pending travel to the United States as of late June, 80 others were being denied as nationals from banned countries, according to a court filing by government attorneys.

During last week’s hearing, a Justice Department attorney told Whitehead that government officials were trying their best to comply with both the judge’s preliminary injunction and the Trump administration’s travel ban. Whitehead’s ruling Monday acknowledged that injunctions couldn’t override a separate executive order but that, in this case, it wasn’t necessary because the travel ban expressly didn’t limit individuals from seeking refugee status.

“In other words, by its plain terms, the Proclamation excludes refugees from its scope,” Whitehead said in his order. “That includes, of course, Injunction-Protected Refugees.” Processing must also resume for others

Additional refugees, including unaccompanied minor children and Afghans at Camp As Sayliyah — set up by the U.S. Army following the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan — were ordered to resume being processed barring any challenge by the government within two weeks.

For all other vetted refugees whose travel was canceled after Dec. 1 and never rebooked, the government must assess their cases individually for injunction-protection eligibility based on conditions set forth by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, according to Whitehead’s order. The ruling Monday also set up a framework for the two opposing sides in the lawsuit to resolve disputes over eligibility.

Whitehead previously stated his intention to appoint a special master to assist with case-by-case determinations, but on Monday he appointed U.S. Magistrate Judge Michelle L. Peterson to the role, agreeing with the government’s position that existing resources and not specialized expertise could handle the responsibility.

“The Court expects all parties to implement this framework in good faith, recognizing that real families remain in limbo while these legal processes unfold,” Whitehead wrote. “Delays in implementation mean continued separation from safety for some of the world’s most vulnerable people.”

One of the plaintiffs in the case, referred to by the pseudonym “Pacito,” resettled into the United States earlier this month. Pacito requested anonymity for fear that their participation could cause harm to them or their family, according to the suit. A refugee from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, previously residing in Kenya, Pacito and his wife had sold all of their family’s possessions and given up their rental home in preparation for travel to the United States in January before their trip was canceled, the suit said.

Pacito has become the legal standard-bearer for other refugees who could be protected under the federal court’s injunction, requiring them to meet “a strong reliance interest” or essentially circumstances comparable to Pacito’s.

“Our plaintiff Pacito safely resettled in the United States last week as a result of this lawsuit, and yesterday’s order laid the framework for additional refugees to receive the same opportunity,” Alp said Tuesday.

In March, Whitehead issued a second preliminary injunction in the lawsuit that prevented the Trump administration from terminating agreements with national resettlement agencies.