1/ Thread on Washington v. Trump – the panel unanimously upholds the district court’s injunction in 27 page opinion.

2/ CA9 holds that district court opinion qualifies as a Preliminary Injunction, so review is appropriate

3/ Panel finds standing bc injuries to public universities.

4/ Schools can assert rights of their students. The court does not reach parens patriae theory of standing.

5/ Panel rejects gov assertion that order not subject to judicial review.

6/ Panel charges SG with misquoting from Mandel about reviewability of visa decisions – applies to all exec branch actions

7/ CA9 goes full #SCOTUS on national security, citing Quirin, Milligan, and HLP

8/ Panel further cites Boumediene, Hamdi, and Endo (the detainee case people forget about).

9/ Opinion starts with Due Process (not Establishment Clause). Rejects gov assertion that aliens not entitled to due process

10/ The 9th Circuit charitably describes the district court’s opinion as ruling on due process grounds. It did not such thing. No reasoning

11/ Panel shows that there is no authority that Due Process does not apply to alines. However, no authority that it does apply.

12/ CA9 also says no authority that memo from White House Counsel supersedes the Exec Order

13/ The panel also asserts that Due Process Right of citizens, related to aliens, could be vindicated in future actions

14/ CA9 rejects argument that TRO should be narrowed in scope. Citizens may have interests for non-citizen travel.

15/ Citing US v. Texas, CA9 rejects call to limit scope of injunction to member states (an arg that Wash opposed) http://joshblackman.com/blog/2017/02/01/washington-seeks-nationwide-injunction-of-immigration-order-relying-on-argument-it-opposed-u-s-v-texas/ …

16/ Relying on Larson and Lukumi, CA9 says “evidence of purpose beyond face” may be consdiered