美国国家公共电台 NPR DOJ Files Brief In Appeals Court, Defending Trump's Immigration Executive Order

（单词翻译）

STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:

Properly vetted¹ refugees can enter the United States, at least today. That's because a judge temporarily blocked President Trump²'s ban on travel for refugees and people from seven countries. Today, judges from a federal appeals court hear arguments over whether to let the ban take effect once again. Let's talk about this with NPR's Joel Rose, who's on the line.

Joel, good morning.

JOEL ROSE, BYLINE³: Good morning, Steve.

INSKEEP: So what are the court proceedings⁴ today?

ROSE: Well, the court has moved really quickly through all of this. Remember, the temporary restraining order was issued on Friday. Briefings on the case were due on Monday for the appellants and later on Monday for the Department of Justice. And now the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in California has asked the lawyers for both sides to call in for a hearing by telephone today at 3:00 p.m. Pacific Time. That's 6:00 p.m. on the East Coast.

INSKEEP: And just so we're clear on what's happening here, this is all about a temporary stay of the order. It is temporarily stayed, it's stopped. The appeals court might decide to leave that stay in effect or - the question is whether the law - whether the executive order stays in effect while they're arguing about it in court. What's the Justice Department saying about all this?

ROSE: Well, lawyers for the Justice Department say the president acted lawfully⁵, that he has broad powers when it comes to immigration policy and national security and that this is an issue for the federal government, not for the states. Lawyers for the Department of Justice also say that this is not a ban on Muslims. DOJ lawyers argue that the executive order is actually neutral when it comes to religion because it blocks all people from those seven countries, whether they are Muslim or not.

INSKEEP: Although, of course, there are references to people of minority religions. Now, you mentioned an issue for the states as opposed to the federal government, which I guess is important because of who's suing. It's Washington state and the state of Minnesota here suing.

ROSE: That's right. Washington was the original plaintiff and then Minnesota joined later. They say that the appeals court would unleash⁷ chaos⁸ if it reinstates the president's executive order. They say the lower court was entitled to think about what the president and his advisers⁹ actually intended when they crafted this order. And to the states, there is plenty of evidence based on what Trump and his advisers have said to conclude that the order is intended to keep Muslims out of the country. The state of Washington says that thousands of its residents have been harmed by this order because it's deprived them of their rights to travel freely and it's separated families.

And those lawyers say the order has also cost financial harm to Washington businesses and public universities.

INSKEEP: You point out residents, that's because the original executive order included hundreds of thousands of green card holders¹⁰, is that right?

ROSE: Right, it included those lawful⁶ permanent residents as well as travelers with valid¹¹ visas. So, you know, the appeals court will have to consider all of that. The three-judge panel here in this case has two Democrats¹² on it and one Republican. Another interesting point that the Justice Department brought up in its brief that I want to mention that could contribute to the potential outcome here - if there's going to be a restraining order, lawyers for the Department of Justice say it should have been narrowly tailored to protect those state residents who are affected¹³ by this travel ban.

So by that logic¹⁴, the court could allow President Trump's executive order to take effect but only for people who have never been to the United States. That would include refugees and the visa holders who just haven't been here yet. And so that seems...

INSKEEP: Which is significant because the president is said to have really strong powers when it comes to just who to let into the United States in the first place.

ROSE: That's right. So the Department of Justice lawyers seem to be offering the court sort of a middle way here. But whatever the Ninth Circuit Court decides, this issue may be heading for the Supreme¹⁵ Court. But, of course, the Supreme Court is ideologically¹⁶ split, has only eight members for the moment. So if there's a 4-4 tie, that means this appeals court ruling could stand.

INSKEEP: Joel, thanks.

ROSE: You're welcome.

INSKEEP: That's NPR's Joel Rose.