Trump's Executive order on Immigration: What we know so far and what we don't

President Trump's finished his first week in office with a executive order on immigration that ignited nationwide protests — and a slew of legal challenges. The immigration ban unleashed chaos on the immigration system and in airports in the United States and overseas, and prompted protests and legal action. At least four federal judges across the country have blocked part of the order and temporarily ensured refugees and travelers who reached U.S. soil would not be deported. It was also condemned by former President Barack Obama, at least 100 American diplomats and the acting Attorney General, Sally Yates, who Mr. Trump quickly fired on Monday night.

Here's an explanation of what happened so far and what could come next.

What is the executive order and who does it affect?

The order suspended all refugee admission for 120 days and bars all Syrian refugees indefinitely. And bans nationals and travelers from seven largely-Muslim countries — Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Libya, and Somalia — from entering the U.S. for at least 90 days. It also capped the total number of refugees allowed into the country this year at 50,000, less than half the limit proposed by the Obama Administration. Reince Priebus, the White House Chief of Staff, said that green-card holders from the seven targeted countries would not be prevented from returning to the United States. However, immigration lawyers are advising all green card holders to hold off on traveling abroad for the time being.

What have the federal courts ruled so far?

Late Saturday, Judge Ann Donnelly issued a temporary restraining order barring the deportation of as many as 200 people and demanded that the Trump administration provide a list of all affected refugees and travelers. A federal judge in suburban Virginia ordered that travelers be allowed to consult with volunteer attorneys. Another judge in Massachusetts ruled the travelers not only were free from deportation but that those that were being held must be released from federal detention. At least 100 diplomats at the State Department signed a draft memo against the policy, calling it counterproductive in the country’s fight against radical groups. Former President Barack Obama criticized the executive order and endorsed the protests against it. Finally, the acting United States attorney general, Sally Q. Yates, ordered the Justice Department not to defend the executive order in court, as she did not believe the order to be lawful. President Trump fired Ms. Yates just hours after she defied him, saying she had “betrayed” his administration and was “weak on borders and very weak on illegal immigration.” Mr. Trump replaced Ms. Yates with Dana Boente, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.

How is Trump's administration defending the controversial executive order?

White House officials defended the policy by saying that it is designed to protect American borders and to restrict the entry of terror suspects. The president and his team downplayed any negative effects of the order, calling them minor inconveniences in the name of public safety. “There is nothing nice about searching for terrorists before they can enter our country,” Trump wrote on Twitter. DHS officials added that less than 1 percent of the average 325,000 people who journeyed to the U.S. Saturday were "inconvenienced.", and that president's order remains in place. "The U.S. government retains its right to revoke visas at any time if required for national security or public safety." On NBC's Meet The Press on Sunday, White House chief of staff Reince Priebus said green card holders would not be affected "moving forward," but went on to say that they would "be subjected to further screening" at the border.

What are the legal challenges going forward?

The President has authority on matters of immigration. Federal law allows the president to suspend people or classes of people if he determines their entry is "detrimental" to the nation. However, in 1965 an update to the Immigration and Naturalization Act, clarifies that people should not experience preferences or discrimination based on "race, sex, nationality, place of birth or place of residence." Trump's order appears to grant some religious preference to Christians. "Christians in the Middle-East have been executed in large numbers. We cannot allow this horror to continue!" he said on Twitter. He also added that his order refers to the same people already singled out for extra vetting during the Obama years. We can expect more lawsuits in the coming days as lawyers from the American Civil Liberties Union for violations of the 1965 amendment to the Immigration and Naturalization Act and the First Amendment clause that bars Congress from establishing a religion.

Democrats argue that key offices within the State Department and the Justice Department were in the dark about the immigration order before it was made public. It was created with little to no legal review or input from the departments most involved in carrying it out, in particular, Homeland Security. It was written by a small White House team overseen by Stephen K. Bannon, the chief White House strategist, and former Breitbart News executive. Press Secretary, Spicer, quickly shot down critics, “The president has a very clear vision. … He’s going to put the safety of this country first,” he said. “If somebody has a problem with that agenda, then they should — that does call into question whether or not they should continue in that post or not.” While border agents have been granted “discretionary authority” to subject travelers, including American citizens, to additional scrutiny it remains unclear what that would look like in practice and how it will be interpreted and carried out in the weeks ahead. It is also unclear how consistently airport officials across the country were complying with the court rulings that partly blocked Mr. Trump’s executive order.