1 00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:03,560 Speaker 1: On September twenty, President Trump issued a revised travel ban, 2 00:00:04,080 --> 00:00:07,120 Speaker 1: indefinitely suspending most travel from six countries that he had 3 00:00:07,120 --> 00:00:11,239 Speaker 1: previously done and adding Chad, North Korea, and also in 4 00:00:11,320 --> 00:00:14,200 Speaker 1: a limited way, Venezuela. Many legal analysts think that the 5 00:00:14,240 --> 00:00:17,040 Speaker 1: challenge is not as legally vulnerable as previous versions of 6 00:00:17,040 --> 00:00:20,120 Speaker 1: the band, but we now have the first legal challenge 7 00:00:20,160 --> 00:00:22,960 Speaker 1: to it um and some immigration advocates are saying could 8 00:00:22,960 --> 00:00:25,239 Speaker 1: be the cruelest one yet because it has fewer exemptions 9 00:00:25,239 --> 00:00:28,080 Speaker 1: for family members of those already in the United States. 10 00:00:28,320 --> 00:00:31,520 Speaker 1: Here to talk with us about the legal challenge to 11 00:00:31,600 --> 00:00:35,000 Speaker 1: the third version of President Trump's travel ban is Eric Larson, 12 00:00:35,040 --> 00:00:39,920 Speaker 1: a Bloomberg News legal reporter. Eric tell us, what you know. 13 00:00:39,960 --> 00:00:43,239 Speaker 1: This lawsuit many people thought would might might not have 14 00:00:43,320 --> 00:00:45,480 Speaker 1: as good a chance of winning as the previous ones 15 00:00:45,560 --> 00:00:47,920 Speaker 1: did because the President might have done a better job 16 00:00:48,360 --> 00:00:51,640 Speaker 1: in having this one written, this order written. What is 17 00:00:51,720 --> 00:00:56,160 Speaker 1: the basis for the challenge in this new lawsuit? Well, 18 00:00:56,280 --> 00:00:59,680 Speaker 1: thank you. It's very interesting in that despite all of 19 00:00:59,800 --> 00:01:03,720 Speaker 1: the work that has clearly gone into crafting this this 20 00:01:03,880 --> 00:01:06,800 Speaker 1: third version of the travel band and putting together very 21 00:01:06,840 --> 00:01:11,520 Speaker 1: specific national security justifications tailor essentially for each of the 22 00:01:11,560 --> 00:01:14,440 Speaker 1: countries that are on the list now, including as you mentioned, 23 00:01:14,520 --> 00:01:18,880 Speaker 1: North Korea and Venezuela. UM, the same flaws that are 24 00:01:19,000 --> 00:01:23,880 Speaker 1: still there according to these UH. The latest lawsuit, the 25 00:01:23,880 --> 00:01:27,600 Speaker 1: one that was filed late Monday night by an Iranian 26 00:01:27,640 --> 00:01:30,480 Speaker 1: diaspora group that says that once again, like the other 27 00:01:30,520 --> 00:01:35,840 Speaker 1: two orders before it, this proclamation discriminates against people based 28 00:01:35,840 --> 00:01:40,360 Speaker 1: on religion UH and is therefore violates the Constitution so 29 00:01:40,440 --> 00:01:45,440 Speaker 1: in the Immigration UH Nationality Act. So it's once again 30 00:01:45,480 --> 00:01:48,320 Speaker 1: I'm gonna be up to adjudge to decide essentially whether 31 00:01:48,760 --> 00:01:53,680 Speaker 1: Trump's own comments on the campaign trail undermined this law. Eric, 32 00:01:53,920 --> 00:01:57,760 Speaker 1: these case, this case involves Iranians in the United States 33 00:01:57,800 --> 00:01:59,960 Speaker 1: or people of Iranian descent in the United States. Who's 34 00:02:00,040 --> 00:02:02,880 Speaker 1: say that family members or potential family members can't get what? 35 00:02:02,880 --> 00:02:04,600 Speaker 1: What are the facts? What are the facts about the 36 00:02:04,640 --> 00:02:08,760 Speaker 1: plaintiffs here? Well, the plaintiffs they're actually they're they're not 37 00:02:08,919 --> 00:02:11,920 Speaker 1: named in the laws, dude, They're listed at DOE plaintiffs. 38 00:02:11,960 --> 00:02:16,000 Speaker 1: There are six of them. They're affiliated with an organization 39 00:02:16,040 --> 00:02:20,520 Speaker 1: called the Iranian Alliances Across the Borders. UM. They are 40 00:02:20,720 --> 00:02:27,280 Speaker 1: essentially trying to get various family members back into the 41 00:02:27,360 --> 00:02:31,840 Speaker 1: United States, whether their fiance's or sister in law, in 42 00:02:31,919 --> 00:02:35,280 Speaker 1: laws and things like that. And this law doesn't have 43 00:02:35,480 --> 00:02:39,359 Speaker 1: as it's got more narrow categories. This order has more 44 00:02:39,440 --> 00:02:42,280 Speaker 1: narrow categories than the previous orders did in terms of 45 00:02:42,280 --> 00:02:46,800 Speaker 1: who can come in. Isn't that right? Uh, that's corrected. Actually, 46 00:02:46,880 --> 00:02:49,560 Speaker 1: the you may recall from the previous order that there 47 00:02:49,600 --> 00:02:53,480 Speaker 1: were various uh, family members that are types of bona 48 00:02:53,520 --> 00:02:56,720 Speaker 1: fide relationships as they called them, that were exempted, and 49 00:02:56,720 --> 00:03:00,240 Speaker 1: there were some court battles over those definitions that went 50 00:03:00,280 --> 00:03:02,440 Speaker 1: up to the Supreme Court and we sent back down. 51 00:03:02,880 --> 00:03:06,880 Speaker 1: But that travel van expired and this new one doesn't 52 00:03:06,919 --> 00:03:10,120 Speaker 1: include any of those exemptions, so uh. And it also 53 00:03:10,200 --> 00:03:13,560 Speaker 1: doesn't have an expiration date. The previous travel ban was 54 00:03:13,600 --> 00:03:16,799 Speaker 1: intended to be ninety days. That's why it expired. This 55 00:03:16,840 --> 00:03:20,760 Speaker 1: one doesn't happen. Eric, I'm gonna have to leave you there. 56 00:03:20,800 --> 00:03:23,480 Speaker 1: Thanks to Eric Larson, Bloomberg News Leagal reporter for being 57 00:03:23,520 --> 00:03:24,560 Speaker 1: here on Bloomberg Block.