As reported, U.S. District Judge James Robart in Seattle, Washington imposed a nationwide hold on President Donald Trump’s ban on travelers and immigrants from seven countries on Feb 3.

However, there was another ruling by another U.S. District Judge Ann Donnelly in New York on Jan 28.

What is the difference between the 2 court rulings?

1 Answer 1


Basically, the ruling by U.S. District Judge Ann Donnelly in New York temporarily halted the deportations of individuals detained in airports.

Donnelly [...] ruled in the Eastern District of New York that "there is imminent danger that, absent the stay of removal, there will be substantial and irreparable injury to refugees, visa-holders, and other individuals from nations subject" to Trump's order.

Source: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/316714-federal-judge-blocks-trump-immigration-ban-nationwide

The ruling by U.S. District Judge James Robart in Seattle temporarily blocks Trump's travel ban altogether nationwide.

CBS News’ Paula Reid said the order, for the time being, effectively rescinds the Trump executive action, putting on hold the most controversial provisions of the law - including suspending entry of immigrants and nonimmigrants from the relevant counties; banning of refugees from certain countries; giving preference for some refugees based on religion; and banning of Syrian refugees.

Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/federal-judge-declines-to-extend-one-week-freeze-against-trumps-travel-ban/

So, in conclusion, the first court ruling halted the removal of individuals that have already arrived in the US while the latter suspended Trump's travel ban altogether.

  • 5
    Also, Donnelly's ban only applied to people in the Eastern District of New York. I.e. people who could sue in her court. And it didn't stop the detainment, just the deportation.
    – Brythan
    Commented Feb 4, 2017 at 16:42

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .