2

their burden of establishing a strong likelihood of success on the merits of their Establishment Clause claim, that irreparable injury is likely if the requested relief is not issued, and that the balance of the equities and public interest counsel in favor of granting the requested relief. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ Motio n (ECF No. 2 38) is GRANTED.

BACKGROUND

The Court briefly recounts the factual and procedural background relevant to Plaintiffs’ Motion. A fuller recitation of the facts is set forth in the Court’s TRO.

See

TRO 3–14, ECF No. 219.

I. The President’s Executive Orders A. Executive Order No. 13,769

On January 27, 2017, the President of the United States issued Executive Order No. 13,769 entitled, “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States,” 82 Fed. Reg. 8977 (Jan. 27, 2017).

1

On March 6, 2017, the

1

On February 3, 2017, the State filed its complaint and an initial motion for TRO, which sought to enjoin Sections 3(c), 5(a)–(c), and 5(e) of Executive Order No. 13,769. Pls.’ Mot. for TRO, Feb. 3, 2017, ECF No. 2. The Court stayed t he case (

see

ECF Nos. 27 & 32 ) after the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington entered a nationwide preliminary injunction enjoining the Government from enforcing the same provisions of Executive Order No. 13,769 targeted by the State.

See Washington v. Trump

, No. C17-0141JLR, 2017 WL 462040 (W.D. Wash. Feb. 3, 2017). On February 4, 2017, the Government filed an emergency motion in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit seeking a stay of the

Washington

TRO, pending appeal. That emergency motion was denied on February 9, 2017.

See Washington v. Trump

, 847 F.3d 115 1 (9th Cir.) (per curium),

denying reconsideration en banc

, --- F.3d ---, 2017