Case 1:17-cv-00255-TSC Document 19 Filed 03/01/17 Page 1 of 6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
PARS EQUALITY CENTER, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the
United States, et al.,

Civil Action No. 1:17-cv-255-TSC

Defendants.

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE
AMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE AND
THE SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER IN SUPPORT OF
MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

INTRODUCTION
Currently before the Court is Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction to
halt enforcement of President Trump’s Executive Order banning immigrants and
refugees from predominantly Muslim countries from entering the United States.
Exec. Order No. 13,769, 82 Fed. Reg. 8977 (Jan. 27, 2017). Americans United for
Separation of Church and State and the Southern Poverty Law Center respectfully
request leave to file the accompanying proposed amicus brief in support of the
Plaintiffs.
IDENTITY AND INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE
a. Americans United for Separation of Church and State is a national,
nonsectarian public-interest organization. Its mission is twofold: (1) to advance the
 

 Case 1:17-cv-00255-TSC Document 19 Filed 03/01/17 Page 2 of 6

free-exercise rights of individuals and religious communities to worship as they see
fit, and (2) to preserve the separation of church and state as a vital component of
democratic government. Americans United represents more than 125,000 members
and supporters across the country. Since its founding in 1947, Americans United has
regularly participated as a party, as counsel, or as an amicus curiae in leading
church–state cases decided by the United States Supreme Court and by federal and
state trial and appellate courts throughout the country.
Americans United has long defended the fundamental rights of religious
minorities in the United States by bringing and participating in legal challenges to
governmental action that singles out particular religions for favor or disfavor. See,
e.g., Ziglar v. Abbasi, 2016 WL 7473962 (U.S. 2016) (supporting Muslim petitioners
who overstayed their visas and were detained and tortured after the terror attacks of
September 11, 2001, before being released as innocent of any connection to terrorism);
Hassan v. City of New York, 2014 WL 3572027 (3d Cir. 2015) (supporting challenge
to New York City Police Department’s surveillance of Muslim communities); Awad v.
Ziriax, 2011 WL 2118216 (10th Cir. 2012) (supporting challenge to Oklahoma law
that singled out Islam for official disfavor). Americans United also advocated for
passage of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000bb (under which
a claim has been made in this case) and its sister statute, the Religious Land Use and
Institutionalized Persons Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000cc et seq., and routinely participates
as counsel or as an amicus curiae in cases arising under these statutes. See, e.g., Holt
v. Hobbs, 2014 WL 2361896 (2015). Notably, Americans United filed an amicus brief
in Cutter v. Wilkinson, 544 U.S. 709 (2005), proposing the factors for the test of

2

 Case 1:17-cv-00255-TSC Document 19 Filed 03/01/17 Page 3 of 6

constitutionally permissible religious accommodations under RFRA and RLUIPA
that the Supreme Court then adopted.
b. The Southern Poverty Law Center has provided pro bono civil-rights
representation to low-income persons in the Southeast since 1971, with particular
focus on seeking justice for the most vulnerable people in society. SPLC has litigated
numerous cases to enforce the civil rights of immigrants and refugees to ensure that
they are treated with dignity and fairness. SPLC monitors and exposes extremists
who attack or malign groups of people based on their immutable characteristics.
SPLC is dedicated to reducing prejudice and improving intergroup relations. SPLC
has a strong interest in opposing governmental action premised on unlawful
discrimination that undermines the promise of civil rights for all.
REASONS WHY THE MOTION SHOULD BE GRANTED
1. The issues in this case have important ramifications for persons living across
the United States and around the world. If the challenged Executive Order is not
preliminarily enjoined, family members who currently find themselves living in
different countries will be estranged. Children seeking to come to the United States
for necessary medical care will be barred. People lawfully residing and working in the
United States will be prevented from traveling abroad by the threat that they will be
detained and deported when they try to return home—or if they are already traveling
abroad, they will have no way to avoid that consequence. In short, religion (albeit
couched in the language of national origin) will determine whether hundreds of
thousands of people have access (or continued access) to the opportunities of life in
the United States.

3

 Case 1:17-cv-00255-TSC Document 19 Filed 03/01/17 Page 4 of 6

2. What is more, the targeted Muslims will not be the only ones affected by
implementation of the Executive Order. The seismic shift in this Nation’s treatment
of a religious minority will be felt by families, neighborhoods, houses of worship, local
businesses, and public universities and institutions. All will suffer the loss of valued
employees, customers, relatives, and members of the community.
3. The hardships in this country and around the world that will be caused by
official discrimination against a disfavored religious group highlight the importance
of correctly analyzing and deciding questions of religious-freedom rights—legal issues
that amici are uniquely positioned to assist this Court in assessing. The proposed
amicus brief explains why both the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act bar enforcement of
the anti-Muslim Executive Order, and hence why Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on
the merits and why an injunction should issue. As the proposed brief explains, the
government is forbidden to discriminate against Muslims. It is forbidden to endorse
or disfavor one religion as compared with others. And it is forbidden to impose or
apply religious tests in making official determinations and taking official actions. The
Executive Order does all of this and more.
4. Amici also filed briefs addressing the Establishment Clause and RFRA
issues in the challenge to the Executive Order pending in the Ninth Circuit (Brief of
Amici Curiae Americans United for Separation of Church and State and Southern
Poverty Law Center, Washington v. Trump, No. 17-35105, 2017 WL 526497 (9th Cir.
Feb. 9, 2017)) and the Western District of Washington (Brief of Amicus Curiae
Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Washington v. Trump, No.
2:17-cv-141, 2017 WL 462040 (W.D. Wash. Feb. 3, 2017)) and in the challenge pending
4

 Case 1:17-cv-00255-TSC Document 19 Filed 03/01/17 Page 5 of 6

in the Eastern. District of Virginia (Brief of Amici Curiae Americans United for
Separation of Church and State and Southern Poverty Law Center, Aziz v. Trump,
No. 1:17-cv-116, 2017 WL 580855 (E.D. Va. Feb. 13, 2017)).
5. Plaintiffs have consented to this motion and to the filing of the accompanying
amicus brief. Defendants have stated that they take no position on the motion and
the filing of the amicus brief.
6. Amici waive hearing and oral argument on this motion.
CONCLUSION
The Court should grant the request to file the proposed amicus brief and order
the Clerk to accept the accompanying brief for filing.
Date: March 1, 2017
Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Richard B. Katskee
KRISTI L. GRAUNKE
pro hac vice motion forthcoming
GILLIAN GILLERS
pro hac vice motion forthcoming
Southern Poverty Law Center
1989 College Avenue NE
Atlanta, GA 30317
Tel.: (404) 521-6700
Fax: (404) 221-5857
Email: Kristi.Graunke@splcenter.org
Gillian.Gillers@splcenter.org

RICHARD B. KATSKEE
BRADLEY GIRARD
admission pending
Americans United for Separation of
Church and State
1310 L Street NW, Suite 200
Washington, D.C. 20005
Tel.: (202) 466-3234
Fax: (202) 466-3353
Email: katskee@au.org
girard@au.org

Counsel for Amici Curiae

5

 Case 1:17-cv-00255-TSC Document 19 Filed 03/01/17 Page 6 of 6

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that on March 1, 2017, the foregoing brief was filed using the Court’s
CM/ECF system. All participants in the case are registered CM/ECF users and will
be served electronically via that system.
/s/ Richard B. Katskee
Counsel for Amici Curiae