SEATTLE — Legal challenges against President Trump’s revised travel ban mounted Thursday as Washington state said it would renew its request to block the executive order and a judge granted Oregon’s request to join the case.

The events came a day after Hawaii launched its own lawsuit, and Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson said New York state also asked to join his state’s legal effort.

Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey said the Bay State is joining fellow states in challenging the revised travel ban.

Washington was the first state to sue over the original ban, which resulted in Judge James Robart in Seattle halting its implementation around the country.

Ferguson said the state would ask Robart to rule that his temporary restraining order against the first ban applies to Trump’s revised action.

Robart on Thursday granted Oregon’s request to join Washington and Minnesota in the case opposing the travel ban.

Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum said the executive order has hurt Oregon, its residents, employers, agencies, educational institutions, health care system and economy.

Trump’s revised ban bars new visas for people from six predominantly Muslim countries: Somalia, Iran, Syria, Sudan, Libya and Yemen. It also temporarily shuts down the U.S. refugee program.

Unlike the initial order, the new one says current visa holders won’t be affected, and removes language that would give priority to religious minorities.

Hawaii Attorney General Douglas Chin said that the state could not stay silent on Trump’s travel ban because of Hawaii’s unique culture and history.

Hawaii depends heavily on tourism, and the revised ban would hurt the state’s economy, he said.

The courts need to hear “that there’s a state where ethnic diversity is the norm, where people are welcomed with aloha and respect,” Chin said.

He noted that the new travel ban order comes just after the 75th anniversary of the Feb. 19, 1942, executive order by President Franklin Roosevelt that sent Japanese Americans to internment camps during World War II. That order was put in place after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Hawaii had an internment camp.

Ferguson said it’s not the government, but the court, that gets to decide whether the revised order is different enough that it would not be covered by previous temporary restraining order.

“It cannot be a game of whack-a-mole for the court,” he said. “In our view, this new executive order contains many of the same legal weaknesses as the first and reinstates some of the identical policies as the original.”

White House spokesman Sean Spicer said Thursday the administration believed the revised travel ban will stand up to legal scrutiny.

“We feel very confident with how that was crafted and the input that was given,” Spicer said.