I guess the judge thinks that more than one clause in one section of one law is relevant.
Not sure the decision won't be reversed on appeal. But the complaint clearly has some persuasive force. The TRO suggests the judge thinks the complaint is likely to prevail on the merits.
A lot of visa holders were damaged by the revocation of their visas. If the EO proves unlawful, is there a remedy?
I wonder what the former acting AG is thinking.