Um, okay, but why is it newsworthy that they met the court-imposed deadline? And what was the content of the brief?
Sometimes only MSM can tell you what you want to know.
Hair Furor DrumpfenfĂĽhrer gesagt:
Radicalized Moose Lambs are a danger to our homeland, and they cannot be allowed into the homeland because Der Drumpenführer has said they must be banned and if moose-lambs make a terrier attack here it is so-called jason judge robard’s fault and the court system and if the ninth circuit doesnt overturn this outrageous french accent order Der Drumpenführer will fire the entire court and appoint new judges who understand who the boss really is.
===========================================
ETA:
Okay, I’ve read the DoJ brief. IANAL, but I read English very well. The DoJ’s case seems to come down to this: (1) aliens without permanent resident status have no Constitutional rights, especially when they are outside the country. (2) States cannot sue the Federal Government on behalf of their citizens. (3) Besides all that, the order is not biased against Muslims, because some Muslim majority countries are not on the prohibited list. Even if it was biased against Muslims, it doesn’t matter because (1). Finally, there are the national security arguments, which make about as much sense as the rant above.
It’s this pic that’s in the NYT article that says without using words that what trump is doing is evil.
Arafat Ashegaa, right, with his wife, Zahrah, and their infant son, Ayhm, arrived from Yemen at Kennedy International Airport in New York on Sunday. Mr. Ashegaa is American, but his wife is a Yemeni citizen who was recently granted a visa to join him here.
Trump administration lawyers tried Monday to persuade a federal appeals court to reinstate the president’s ban on travel to the United States from seven Muslim-majority nations and his suspension of all refugee admissions — a long shot at best, according to legal analysts.
the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco scheduled a hearing for Tuesday afternoon on whether to uphold or overturn a ruling by a federal judge in Seattle on Friday that suspended Trump’s Jan. 27 executive order.
A final decision on the legality of the order is probably months away, if not longer, and will likely be made by the U.S. Supreme Court. But in the short run, according to legal scholars consulted Monday, its fate depends on judges’ assessment of whether enforcement or non-enforcement will cause hardship to the nation, and the administration hasn’t made much of a case so far.
[quote=“TPM, post:1, topic:50984”]
WASHINGTON (AP) — Justice Dept. files brief with federal appeals court in Trump administration travel ban case.
Copyright 2017 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.[/quote]
There really should be a law somewhere that says, “An article is not worthy of copyright protection if it’s shorter than the copyright notice.”