Trump's travel ban in court (again), but with a difference

Will the third time be the charm for the Trump administration?

An almost constant feature of Donald Trump’s presidency has been litigation over his trio of travel-ban executive actions, which restrict entry into the US for certain classes of immigrants from six Muslim-majority countries.

The travel ban has also become the primary battleground for larger debates over how the judicial system should respond to a presidency that has defied governmental orthodoxy in numerous ways.

The administration has framed the executive actions as tightening immigration policies to prevent potentially dangerous individuals from entering the country. For litigants – who have included national civil rights and immigrant advocacy groups, state governments, universities, and individuals around the country – the executive actions represent a thinly veiled attempt to implement the “Muslim ban” Trump promised during his presidential campaign.

Plaintiffs have consistently argued that

The national-security argumentPostscript: How the three bans have differed