In taking their first crack at President Donald Trump’s immigrant travel ban Monday, judges for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit resorted to hypothetical situations to make up for a lack of precedent when forming their questions.
The judges and lawyers repeatedly turned to hypothetical situations throughout the roughly two-hour en banc hearing to formulate their points on Trump’s second version of the order. What if Trump apologized? What if someone else was elected and signed the executive order? What if Trump targeted Israel?
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
