Source: https://www.napaba.org/news/364460/NAPABA-Leads-62-APA-Bar-Assns-in-SCOTUS-Amicus-Brief-Challenging-Revised-Muslim--Refugee-Ban.htm
Timestamp: 2019-04-18 14:18:07+00:00

Document:
WASHINGTON — The National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) led 62 national and local Asian Pacific American bar associations in filing an amicus brief in the consolidated cases, Trump v. State of Hawai`i and Trump v. International Refugee Assistance Project, before the U.S. Supreme Court. Together these Asian Pacific American bar associations urged the Court to support the injunction of President Trump’s March 6, 2017, revised executive order barring refugees and individuals from six Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States.
The Trump Administration’s appeal arises from two challenges to the revised executive order. NAPABA filed an amicus brief opposing the executive order in the first challenge, State of Hawai`i v. Trump. Judge Derrick K. Watson of the U.S. District Court of Hawaii issued an injunction blocking the visa and refugee restrictions. Judge Theodore Chuang of the U.S. District Court of Maryland enjoined the six-country visa ban in International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump.
Both the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in a per curiam ruling, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in a 10-3 en banc ruling, maintained respective lower courts’ blocks on the revised executive order. NAPABA filed amicus briefs, endorsed by 43 Asian Pacific American bar associations, in both circuits urging them to uphold the lower court injunctions.
NAPABA’s Supreme Court amicus brief describes decades of statutory exclusion of citizens of Asian and Pacific Island countries under early U.S. immigration law, including the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 — the first federal law to ban a group of people on the basis of their race. The Civil Rights Era marked a dramatic turning point that saw Congress dismantle nationality-based discrimination with the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. The brief explains that presidential discretion in the area of immigration and refugee admission, while broad, is limited by statute. NAPABA argues that President Trump’s revised order, with its anti-Muslim underpinnings, violates the unambiguous prohibition on discrimination established by Congress.
NAPABA recognizes lead pro bono counsel, James W. Kim, a NAPABA member and partner at McDermott Will & Emery LLP, in Washington, D.C., Mr. Kim’s team (including Andrew Genz, Philip Levine, Llewelyn Engel, and Matthew Girgenti), and NAPABA Amicus Committee co-chairs, Professor Radha Pathak of Whittier Law School and Albert Giang, a partner at Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP in Los Angeles, for their leadership drafting the brief, which also involved the efforts of NAPABA staffers.
Korean American Bar Association of D.C.
Read NAPABA’s amicus brief in the district court in State of Hawai‘i v. Trump.
Read NAPABA’s amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit Case, State of Hawai‘i v. Trump.
Read NAPABA’s amicus brief in the Fourth Circuit case, International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump.
Read the March 6, 2017, statement of NAPABA and the South Asian Bar Association – North America, joined by 14 affiliates, against the revised executive order.
The National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) is the national association of Asian Pacific American attorneys, judges, law professors, and law students. NAPABA represents the interests of almost 50,000 attorneys and approximately 75 national, state, and local Asian Pacific American bar associations. Its members include solo practitioners, large firm lawyers, corporate counsel, legal services and non-profit attorneys, and lawyers serving at all levels of government.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.