Documents in State of Hawaii et al v. Trump—A Challenge to President Trump's March 6, 2017 Travel Ban

Ninth Circuit Decision

Supreme Court Merits Brief filed by Petitioners Donald J. Trump et al.

Supreme Court Merits Brief filed by Respondents Hawaii et al.

Joint Appendix

Amicus Briefs Submitted in Support of Hawaii and the Other Challengers

On March 23, 2018, the State of Hawaii and other challengers filed their brief on the merits outlining the illegality and unconstitutionality of President Trump’s travel ban.

On March 23, 2018, Director William Webster, Gov. Thomas Kean, Gov. Christie Todd Whitman, Sen. Jack Danforth, Peter Keisler, and several others filed a brief in support of Hawaii’s challenge.

Earlier Documents in Challenge to Version 3 of the Travel Ban.

On January 12, 2018, Hawaii and the other plaintiffs filed their opposition to the Trump Administration’s request that the Supreme Court hear their case.

On February 20, 2018, the Trump Administration filed its opening brief in the Supreme Court, defending its third version of its travel ban.

On October 6, 2017, the State of Hawaii and Dr. Elshikh asked the Court to permit amending the complaint to allow a challenge to the latest Travel Ban.

On October 10, 2017, the State of Hawaii and other plaintiffs filed an amended complaint challenging travel ban 3.0.

On October 10, 2017, the State of Hawaii and other plaintiffs filed a brief on the merits and accompanying declarations in support of their complaint.

On October 14, 2017, the Trump Administration filed their opposition to the complaint challenging the latest version of the Travel Ban.

On October 15, 2017, the plaintiffs filed their reply to the Trump Administration's defense of its travel ban.

On October 15, 2017, a large group of national security experts filed a declaration attacking the security rationale for the Trump Administration's travel ban.

On October 17, 2017, the District Court granted the State of Hawaii and other Plaintiffs’ request, stopping enforcement of the third Travel ban for being illegal.

On November 18, 2017, the State of Hawaii and other plaintiffs filed their merits brief challenging the third travel ban.

On March 7, 2017, the State of Hawaii filed a joint motion with the U.S. Government setting out a proposed briefing schedule, whereby it filed its complaint and TRO on March 8, the U.S. Government filed their Opposition on March 13, and oral argument was held on March 15.

On March 7, the State of Hawaii moved for leave to file an Amended Complaint that details their allegations against the new Executive Order. Here is the motion and proposed complaint. The latter document details the Plaintiffs' grievances with respect to President Trump's 3/6/17 Travel Ban.

On March 8, the plaintiffs filed their detailed brief in support of a Temporary Restraining Order.

On March 10, The Anti-Defamation League submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of Plaintiffs' Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order.

On March 10, The Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality, Jay Hirabayashi, Holly Yasui, Karen Korematsu, Civil Rights Organizations and National Bar Associations of Color submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of the Plaintiffs.

On March 10, Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the Southern Poverty Law Center submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of Plaintiffs' Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order.

On March 10, The Roderick and Solange MacArthur Justice Center submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of Plaintiffs' Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order.

On March 10, Human Rights First, KIND, Tahirih Justice Center and HIAS submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of Plaintiffs' Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order.

On March 11, a group of law professors submitted an amicus curiae brief of Law Professors on issue of state standing.

On March 11, participating law firms of the Employment Law Alliance submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of Plaintiffs.

On March 11, international law scholars and nongovernmental organizations submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of Plaintiffs.

On March 12, the Interfaith Coalition submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of Plaintiffs' Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order.

On March 12, National Asian Pacific American Bar Association submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of Plaintiffs' Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order.

On March 12, the Immigration Reform Law Institute submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of Defendants.

On March 13, the American Center for Law & Justice submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of Defendants.

On March 13, the federal government filed their opposition to the Temporary Restraining Order.

On March 13, 13 States plus the District of Columbia filed an amicus brief in support of the State of Hawaii's challenge.

On March 13, the Massachusetts Technology Leadership Council, Inc., submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Temporary Restraining Order.

On March 13, T.A., a U.S. resident of Yemeni descent, filed an amicus curiae brief in support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Temporary Restraining Order.

On March 14, Muslim Advocates, American Muslim Health Professionals, Muppies, Inc., the National Arab American Medical Association, and Network of Arab-American Professionals submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order.

On March 14, the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of Plaintiffs.

On March 14, Plaintiffs filed a Reply in support of a Temporary Restraining Order.

On March 14, New York University submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of Plaintiffs' Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order.

On March 14, a group of technology companies and other businesses submitted an amicus curiae brief in support of Plaintiffs' Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order.

On March 15, the Court issued an Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order.

On March 17, the Government filed a Clarification/Delay Motion.

On March 18, Plaintiffs submitted their opposition to the Government's Clarification/Delay motion.

On March 19, the district court denied the Government's clarification/delay motion.

On March 21, Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Convert the TRO into a PI, and a Memorandum in support of that Motion.

On March 23, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Philadelphia, and Other Major Cities and Counties submitted an amicus brief in support of Plaintiffs’ Motion to Convert Temporary Restraining Order to Preliminary Injunction.

On March 24, the Government filed their opposition to the Conversion Motion.

On March 24, Prof. Victor Williams submitted an amicus brief in support of Defendants.

On March 25, plaintiffs filed their reply on the Conversion Motion.

On March 29, HIAS submitted an amicus brief in support of Plaintiffs’ Motion to Convert Temporary Restraining Order to Preliminary Injunction.

On March 29, Federal District Court Judge Watson ruled against the Trump Administration and granted the plaintiffs' request for a full injunction on the travel and refugee restrictions in the Trump Executive Order.

On March 30, 2017, the Trump Administration filed a notice of appeal.

On April 7, 2017, the Government filed a Brief for Appellants and a Motion of Defendants-Appellants for a Stay Pending Expedited Appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

On April 11, 2017, Plaintiffs asked the 9th Circuit to hear the appeal as an initial en banc.

April 21, 2017. Amicus Brief of 163 Tech Companies including Amazon, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Netflix, Tesla, etc.

On April 21, 2017, the State of Hawaii and Dr. Ismail Elshikh filed a Brief for Plaintiffs-Appellees and an Opposition to Motion of Defendants-Appellants for a Stay Pending Expedited Appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

On April 28, 2017, the Government filed a Reply Brief for Appellants and a Reply of Appellants in Support of Motion for a Stay Pending Expedited Appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

June 1, 2017. Government Supreme Court motion.

On June 12, the State of Hawaii and Dr. Elshikh filed their opposition to the Trump Administration's request to the US Supreme Court to reinstate the Travel Ban.

On June 12, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion affirming the injunction that blocks both the Travel Ban and Refugee Bans nationwide.

On June 29, the State of Hawaii and Dr. Elshikh filed a motion asking the district court to clarify its injunction in response to Trump Administration statements about their plans to implement the Executive Order.

On July 3, the Trump Administration filed its opposition to the motion to clarify the injunction.

On July 5, the State of Hawaii and Dr. Elshikh filed their reply to the Trump Administration’s opposition to the motion to clarify.

On July 7, the State of Hawaii and Dr. Elshikh asked the U.S. Court of Appeals to enforce the injunction blocking large aspects of the Trump Administration’s travel and refugee bans.

On July 7, the State of Hawaii and Dr. Elshikh asked the District Court to enforce or modify the injunction blocking the travel and refugee bans.

On July 13, the state of Hawaii and Dr. Elshikh filed their reply to the Government's opposition to enforce the injunction.

On July 13, the District Court largely granted the State of Hawaii and Dr. Elshikh's requests to clarify and enforce the injunction.

On July 18, the International Refugee Assistance Project filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court opposing the Trump Administration’s request to modify the injunction.

On July 18, 43 former high ranking national security officials (including Senator Lugar, Secretary Kerry, Ambassador Crocker, and Gen. Hayden) filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court opposing the Trump Administration’s request to modify the injunction.

On July 18, law professors filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court opposing the Trump Administration’s request to modify the injunction.

On July 18, members of Congress filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court opposing the Trump Administration’s request to modify the injunction.

On July 18, 2017, the State of Hawaii and Dr. Elshikh filed their U.S. Supreme Court opposition to the Trump Administration’s request to modify the injunction.

On July 18, 15 States plus the District of Columbia filed a brief opposing the Trump Administration’s motion to modify the injunction.

On August 10, the Trump Administration filed their opening Supreme Court brief on the merits.

On Sept 11, the State of Hawaii and the other plaintiffs filed their merits brief in the U.S. Supreme Court.

SUPREME COURT AMICUS BRIEFS

Amicus Brief of 161 Technology Companies Supporting Respondents

Amicus Brief of 37 Appellate Lawyers Supporting Respondents

Amicus for Advocates for Human Rights et al. in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief for American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee Supporting Respondents

Amicus Brief of the American Bar Association Supporting Respondents

Amicus Brief of the American Council on Education and 29 Other Higher Education Associations in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of American Jewish Committee in Support of Respondents and Affirmance

Amicus Brief of American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief for the Association of American Medical Colleges Supporting Respondents

Amicus Brief of the Association of Art Museum Directors, the American Allegiance of Museums, the Association of Academic Museums and Galleries, the College Art Association, and 101 Art Museums Supporting Respondents

Amicus Brief of The Cato Institute in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Philadelphia, and Other Cities and Counties, Joined by the U.S. Conference of Mayors and National League of Citizens in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Colleges and Universities in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Conference of Catholic Bishops et al. Supporting Respondents

Amicus Brief of Constitutional Law Scholars in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Constitutional Law Scholars in Support of Respondents (Prof. Manhaimer and Ilya Somin et al)

Amicus Brief of The Criminal Justice Legal Foundation in Support of Neither Party

Amicus Brief of Episcopal Bishops in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Executive Branch Officials Supporting Respondents

Amicus Brief of Former National Security Officials in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief for the Foundation for the Children of Iran and Iranian Alliances Across Borders Supporting Respondents

Amicus Brief of the Fred Korematsu Center and Civil Rights Organizations Supporting Respondents

Amicus Brief of the Howard University School of Law Civil Rights Clinic, University Professors, and Higher Education Associations Supporting Respondents

Amicus Brief of Human Rights First et al. in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Hussam Ayloush, Zahra Billoo, Robert Mccaw, Corey Saylor, Julia Shearson, Hassan Shibly, And Imraan Siddiqui in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Immigrant Right Organizations Supporting Respondents

Amicus Brief of Immigration Equality, the New York City Gay and Lesbian Anti-Violence Project, and Others in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Immigration, Family and Constitutional Law Professors in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief for Immigration Law Scholars Supporting Respondents

Amicus Brief for Interfaith Group Supporting Respondents

Amicus Brief of International Law Scholars and Nongovernmental Organizations in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Interfaith Coalition in Support of Affirmance and Respondents

Amicus Brief of International Labor Organizations Supporting Respondents

Amicus Brief of Janet Napolitano and Other Former Federal Immigration Officials in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of the Japanese American Citizens League in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Karamah in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Khizr Khan in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Massachusetts Technology Leadership Council, Inc., in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Members of the Clergy, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and Others in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Members of Congress in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Multiple States in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Muslim Justice League in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief for the National Asian Pacific American Bar Ass’n and Others in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of National CIS Council 119 in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief for the National Education Association Supporting Respondents

Amicus Brief for New York University Supporting Respondents

Amicus Brief of Pars Equality Center, Iranian American Bar Association, National Iranian American Council, and Public Affairs Alliance of Iranian Americans, Inc. in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Pen American Center and Other Organizations Supporting Respondents

Amicus Brief of the Port of Seattle in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Professors of Federal Courts Jurisprudence, Constitutional Law, and Immigration Law in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Refugee Organizations in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of the Roderick and Solange MacArthur Justice Center in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief for Scholars of Federal Jurisdiction in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Scholars of Mormon History & Law in Support of Neither Party

Amicus Brief of Social Science Scholars in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief for Syrian Asylee Ahmad M. in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief for T.A., a United States Citizen of Yemeni Descent, in Support of Respondents

Amicus Brief of Tahirih Justice Center, the Asian Pacific Institute of Gender-Based Violence, Casa de Esperanza, and the National Domestic Violence Hotline et al. in Support of Respondents

NOTE: More documents to follow.

Download PDF