How to defend your rights in immigration court

The rights of migrants and refugees to travel freely across the European Union are under attack from an increasingly right-wing, right-leaning administration in the United States.

On Thursday, the US supreme court handed a victory to the Trump administration when it upheld a preliminary injunction blocking the US government from enforcing the new executive order that President Donald Trump signed on March 5.

The court said the government’s move to enforce the order, which suspends US travel for citizens from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen, is unlawful, and thus must be vacated.

The ruling, handed down on the eve of a major conference of European Commission (EC) and EU governments, also said the US must provide “more information” on its plans for implementing the executive order.

The executive order, signed on the orders first day in office, suspends the entry of nationals from the countries of Syria, Iraq, Iran, Somalia and Sudan.

Under the revised order, citizens of these countries can still travel to the US for business, and they can return home.

However, any attempt to re-enter the US through those countries will be suspended, and the US will have no authority to grant visas or entry to citizens of those countries.

According to the draft order, the states are given until July 4 to comply. 

The new US immigration order, meanwhile, is an extreme version of what the European Commission and EU were pushing for when they sued the US in 2015, contending that the executive orders are contrary to the principles of democracy, human rights and human dignity.

The commission is appealing the ruling, arguing that the order violates international law. 

EU parliamentarians on Wednesday agreed to support a draft resolution to amend the US-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), which is a transatlantic trade deal that is meant to create a more open and transparent EU.

The text of the resolution, which was introduced by MEPs for the bloc’s centre-right and centre-left parties, says the trade agreement will help reduce migration and increase the freedom of movement of people.

It also calls for a review of the draft executive order and for the EU to be able to bring more legal cases against it, in order to prevent a return to the dark days of the US. 

Read more: EU demands EU president, Donald Trump, to ‘do the right thing’ after Trump ban The European Commission, which is the EU’s executive arm, and EEA states signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) to counter the US executive order on March 4.

The document is meant as a roadmap for implementing CETA, and was signed by EU leaders Jean-Claude Juncker and Jose Manuel Barroso on March 11.

It was the first formal sign-off on the CETA negotiations since Trump’s executive order was implemented. 

On Wednesday, the European Parliament voted to support the draft resolution on behalf of the European Council. 

This is not the first time that the European parliament has been against the Trump-backed executive order On Thursday, European Parliament President Martin Schulz said the move was unacceptable and a breach of the rule of law.

“The executive order violates fundamental principles of the EU and it undermines democratic principles,” Schulz wrote in a statement.

“There is no place for such a ban.” 

The Trump administration had claimed the ban would create thousands of jobs and increase exports to the EU. 

A draft document published by the European Court of Justice described the order as “dangerous, illegal and disproportionate”, but said that it was being challenged by a “proportionate and credible argument” from the US, Europe and the rest of the world. 

“It is a decision to prevent the flow of goods and people,” the document said. 

European governments had also asked the EU president to clarify the executive ban, saying that the move could “harm the global competitiveness of the [EU]”. 

In the weeks following Trump’s order, protests against the ban spread across Europe, and a number of European countries introduced measures to block US citizens from travelling to the bloc. 

But the new US administration has not given up. 

Trump’s executive action The order has been filed and challenged at the US District Court for the District of Columbia.

The Supreme Court has granted a preliminary preliminary injunction against the president’s order against US citizens from Iran, Sudan, Syria and Yemen in a complaint filed by Euractiv. Following a hearing on the matter Thursday, the court ruled that the Trump Administration’s attempt to enforce the executive order “is unlawful, is unconstitutionally vague and is void for vagueness”. 

“The government has no authority at this time to implement the order,” the court wrote.

“If the Government intends to enforce its order, it must provide more information to the Court about its