On Feb. 15, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals published its long-awaited opinion on the third iteration of the Trump administration’s travel ban. Weighing in at an intimidating 285 pages, International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump included the opinion of the court, four concurrences, and three dissents.
On the off-chance that some haven’t found the time to wade through the entirety of all that jurisprudence, here are each of the eight opinions in the case paraphrased to the size of a haiku poem:
Show religious animus,
And they keep coming.
GREGORY, Chief Judge, concurring:
Is the province of Congress.
Check Article I.
KEENAN, Circuit Judge, concurring:
And, the INA’s
WYNN, Circuit Judge, concurring:
They’re banning Muslims.
The Immigration Act says
They can’t. That’s enough.
HARRIS, Circuit Judge, concurring:
I recommend we
Stick to the Constitution.
No avoiding it.
NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge, dissenting:
Is wrong in every respect.
Tweets don’t prove intent.
TRAXLER, Circuit Judge: dissenting:
This third travel ban
Was more thoughtfully designed.
That outweighs the tweets.
AGEE, Circuit Judge, dissenting:
And, no plaintiff showed
An injury under the