Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement that Justice Department will appeal U.S. District Judge Derrick K. Watson July 13 decision which once again modifys Watson’s injunction against President Donald J. Trump’s January 27, 2017 Executive Order Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States and the President’s March 6, 2017-revised version of the order, which narrowed the scope of his original order — the so-called travel ban:
Once again, we are faced with a situation in which a single federal district court has undertaken by a nationwide injunction to micromanage decisions of the co-equal Executive Branch related to our national security. By this decision, the district court has improperly substituted its policy preferences for that of the Executive branch, defying both the lawful prerogatives of the Executive Branch and the directive of the Supreme Court.
The district court has issued decisions that are entrusted to the Executive Branch, undermined national security, delayed necessary action, created confusion, and violated a proper respect for separation of powers. The Supreme Court has had to correct this lower court once, and we will now reluctantly return directly to the Supreme Court to again vindicate the rule of law and the Executive Branch’s duty to protect the nation.
As we reported previously, Judge Watson flipped flopped on this issue in just a week.
A week ago Judge Watson denied an emergency motion challenging President Donald J. Trump’s so-called travel ban. Hawaii and a local imam sought to have grandparents and other relatives exempt from the executive order, which the Supreme Court allowed to partially be implemented in June:
This Court will not upset the Supreme Court’s careful balancing and “equitable judgment” brought to bear when “tailor[ing] a stay” in this matter.
[. . .]
This Court declines to usurp the prerogative of the Supreme Court to interpret its own order . . .
Yesterday, Judge Watson decided differently and chose to rule on the relationship question instead of deferring to the Supreme Court as he said he should just last week.
So much not wanting to get reversed by the Supreme Court again.