I just wanted to add that this case is far from settled. The Judge issued a temporary restraining order, and there will be more hearings to determine if a permanent restraining order should be issued. There is a legal question of “standing” in which the ACLU and others representing the “immigrant organization groups” must defended their right to sue based on damages done by the Proclamation There really has been no real application of the Proclamation, so attorneys claim a potential damage based on a decline in activity to the non-profit organizations seeking to assist immigrants with their asylum claims.
If the Ninth Circuit Court rules that the plaintiffs lack standing, then the merits of their case can not be adjudicated, and the temporary restraining order would be lifted.
The case East Bay Sanctuary v Trump, Case 18-cv-6810.
The standing question will likely rely on the applicability of “Havens Realty Corp. v. Coleman, 455 U.S. 363 (1982).” I will be following this case closely.