Federal agents broke the law to implement Trumps first travel ban [View all]
On Jan. 27, 2017, Donald Trump issued an executive order prohibiting individuals from seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States. In the following days, several federal judges blocked parts of the ban, and one week later, U.S. District Judge James Robart froze the whole thing. Throughout those chaotic early days, civil rights groups alleged that Customs and Border Protection officers charged with enforcing the policy had violated court orders limiting their authority. On Thursday, the Department of Homeland Securitys Office of Inspector General released a lengthy report confirming that CBP did, in fact, break the law in its implementation of Trumps first travel ban.
CBP ran into legal trouble almost as soon as U.S. District Judge Ann Donnelly barred the government from deporting individuals covered by the executive order. By the time Donnelly issued her ruling in Darweesh v. Trump on Jan. 28 of last year, CBP had detained an Iranian national with a student visa at Los Angeles International Airport for 23 hours. When Donnellys decision came down, the student was in the process of being placed on a flight out of the country. She promptly informed a pair of CBP officers that a judge had issued a restraining order blocking the ban. The officers did not halt her deportation or ask a supervisor about the ruling. Instead, they forced her to board the plane. (Several days later, she obtained permission to fly back.)
The OIG report suggests this incident amounted to an honest mistake, but it is nevertheless sharply critical of CBPs broader interpretation of the Darweesh decision. Donnellys ruling stated that the executive order likely violated due process and equal protection and that the government could not remov[e] individuals covered by the ban. CBP interpreted this to mean that officers could turn away travelers who arrived by land and sea, asserting that these individuals were refused entry, not technically removed. OIG criticized this approach, which barred 30 individuals from entering the country, as a highly aggressive stance in light of the courts concerns.
These actions were arguably legal under an extremely narrow reading of Darweesh. But the next day, Jan. 29, CBP crossed a clear legal line. That morning, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs issued a decision in Louhghalam v. Trump barring CBP officers at Boston Logan International Airport from detaining or removing anyone covered by the order. She also explicitly directed CBP to notify airlines that have flights arriving at Logan Airport that individuals on those flights will not be detained or returned based solely on the basis of the Executive Order.
CBP did the exact opposite of what Burroughs ruling required. The OIG investigation found that the agency continued to call airlines and instruct them not to let travelers board planes to the United States if they were covered by the order. It did so despite having full knowledge of Burroughs restraining order. Indeed, OIG found that CBP did everything in its power to block [these] travelers from boarding flights bound for the United States. Officers threatened airline representatives, asserting that the government would fine them $50,000 and bar their planes from landing if they ignored CBPs (unlawful) orders.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/01/its-now-certain-federal-agents-broke-the-law-to-implement-trumps-first-travel-ban.html