apply to them, so don't worry about it. that's half a million people who are in the united states who overnight at least according to government initially lost their right to travel, to come in and out of the country, to visit their relatives. several people -- >> why shouldn't we limit the order, the temporary restraining order, reached to those people who you've got a strong case for like the lprs? why should the temporary restraining order reach beyond that? that seems to be the government's principle argument that it was overbroad. why isn't it joef broad? >> for three key reasons, your honor. first of all, limiting an orderer in that way would not address all the harms the order is causing. so, for example, it would not remedy the orders violation of the establishment clause which harms everyone in our state as well as our states, themselves, by favoring one religious group over another. it also would not fully remedy the order's violation of the equal protection law.