Travel ban litigation (2017-18)
Federal courts repeatedly blocked versions of the Trump administration's travel ban, with judges finding the stated national-security rationale pretextual. Judge Derrick Watson in Hawaii wrote that the ban "drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination," and courts demanded evidence beyond the administration's assertions.
The Supreme Court ultimately upheld a revised ban, but the lower courts' scrutiny forced the administration to rewrite the policy multiple times.
The litigation set a precedent of judges closely scrutinizing executive immigration claims—and of the administration attacking judicial authority.
The travel ban cases were the first major confrontation between the judiciary and Trump's immigration agenda; the 2026 ICE rulings extend that pattern to the detention system.