Hawaii files emergency motion to challenge implementation of Trump’s travel ban

The state of Hawaii filed an emergency challenge to the Trump administration’s implementation of its executive order on immigration, just minutes before it was set to be partially enforced Thursday evening.

The Supreme Court on Monday lifted most of the lower court restrictions on the order, which calls for the blocking of foreign nationals from six Muslim-majority countries. The high court’s decision allowed the order to take effect, but only for people with no “bona fide” relationships with U.S. residents or entities.

According to guidance released by the Department of Homeland Security Thursday night, people with a parent, spouse, child, sibling or brother or sister in law will be deemed to have close ties to the U.S. and thus must be allowed to enter. But more distant relationships, including grandparents, fiancees, aunts, uncles and the like, will not be allowed entry and will be prevented from entering for 90 days.

Hawaii Attorney General Douglas Chin and private counsel Neal Katyal argued in a motion filed Thursday with U.S. District Court Judge Derrick Watson in Hawaii that the DHS definition of “bona fide” relationship is too narrow.

“This Court should clarify as soon as possible that the Supreme Court meant what it said, and that foreign nationals that credibly claim connections with this country cannot be denied entry under the president’s illegal order,” they wrote.

They argued that the DHS definition was not consistent with either that court’s earlier decision, or the Supreme Court’s decision.

The Trump administration reportedly altered one aspect of its exemption last at the last minute, concerning fiancees. According to Politico, the State Department listed fiancees to the list of “close family” members who could obtain a visa. As of Thursday evening, DHS hadn’t updated its website to include fiancees as part of that list, but a DHS spokesperson told CNN that the agency would also recognize fiancees for the exemption.

It wasn’t clear whether or when the court might issue a ruling on Trump’s definition, and how it might affect implementation of the order, which began at 8 p.m. Thursday night.

Related Content