Appeals court to weigh challenge to revised Trump travel ban

Share

The hearing comes about two months after a federal judge in Maryland blocked the President's revised executive order that sought to bar foreign nationals from six majority-Muslim countries from entering the United States for 90 days.

And Trump suffered two defeats in a 24-hour span on the revised order - one in the decision by Judge Chuang, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, and another by a federal judge in Hawaii.

And challengers to the law say Trump has taken this power to extremes by banning almost entire populations from multiple countries. "He's never repudiated what he said about the Muslim ban". They also claim that the "anti-Muslim animus" underlying the second executive order is readily apparent from the litany of public statements Trump made before and after the presidential campaign.

Trump's Justice Department contends the motivation for the travel ban was to protect the United States from terrorism.

Chuang disagreed with the administration's argument that Trump's campaign statements shouldn't count in lawsuits, and noted that Trump's campaign website still contains a statement on "preventing Muslim immigration" to this day.

The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will listen to arguments on May 15 at its Seattle courthouse.

"That's the most important issue in the whole case", said Judge Robert B. King, who was appointed to the court by President Bill Clinton.

The first decree - which prompted mass protests and sowed chaos at U.S. airports - was blocked by a court in Washington state on the grounds that it violated the USA constitution's prohibition of religious discrimination, a ruling that was upheld on appeal.

If both appeals courts rule in the Trump administration's favor, the temporary travel ban would be allowed as enforceable.

Trump issued the revised travel ban March 6, after suffering repeated legal losses over the first ban.

Meanwhile, a group of 12 state attorneys general and the governor of MS argued that the action is not a "pretext for religious discrimination" and should be allowed to take effect. Judges Michael Daly Hawkins, Ronald Gould and Richard Paez have been assigned to the three judge panel, according to the court's web site. Two recused themselves over potential conflicts of interest, including the conservative J. Harvie Wilkinson, Wall's father-in-law. It was not immediately clear why Duncan is not on the panel.

Six Democratic appointees on a court dominated by judges named by Democratic presidents showed concerns about reviving the Republican president's March executive order that prohibited new visas to enter the United States for citizens of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for three months.

After facing stinging judicial defeats early this year over his controversial effort to bar travelers from six Muslim-majority countries, President Donald Trump is looking Monday to a Virginia court for a measure of vindication. That left nine judges appointed by Democratic presidents, three Republican appointees and one judge originally appointed by a Democrat and later re-appointed by a Republican.

The appeal of President Donald Trump's revised travel ban will go before the entire Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals for oral arguments on Monday.

Trump will also name several additional nominees to the federal appeals court, along with a handful of federal district court nominees.

Share