Court Upholds Ruling Blocking Trump’s Immigration Order

“We’re going to take it through the system”, said Trump. A tie would keep in place whatever the appeals court decides.

“I don’t ever want to call a court biased, so I won’t call it biased”, Trump said of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. “We disagree, as explained above”.

The appeals court in San Francisco has asked both sides to file legal briefs before it makes a final decision. They said it hinders the ability of American companies to attract top talent, and “and is inflicting substantial harm on USA companies”.

The executive order temporarily banned entry for all refugees and visitors from seven mainly Muslim countries, until it was halted last week.

Their ruling also said it was unlikely the White House’s counsel had authority to amend a presidential executive order and that the government did not show how the order could be administered in parts.

Ahead of the 9th Circuit ruling, Robart issued a scheduling order on Tuesday, instructing the states and the Trump administration how the case would move forward.

Justice Department lawyers appealed to the 9th Circuit, arguing that the president has the constitutional power to restrict entry to the United States and that the courts can not second-guess his determination that such a step was needed to prevent terrorism.

The panel of three judges noted that Washington state and Minnesota had raised serious allegations about religious discrimination. Their decision was unanimous. That was one of the questions that the judges considered. He cited instances of residents stranded overseas, families separated, and economic loss. It also hasn’t shown that failure to reinstate the ban would cause irreparable injury.

“That’s not what the order does”, replied Justice Department lawyer August Flentje.

The executive order represented a “significant departure from the principles of fairness and predictability that have governed the immigration system of the USA for more than 50 years”, inflicting “significant harm” on American business, innovation and growth as a result, the brief argued. The legal has been grappling with the order and some travelers have been delayed, while others wondered if they would be allowed previously approved entry into the United States.

Washington state Solicitor General Noah Purcell said the court could look at Trump’s campaign vow to ban all Muslims as evidence of discriminatory intent.

Trump responded on Twitter on Thursday shortly after the decision came out. The case is likely to hit the Supreme Court in coming days. They include: Somalia, Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Syria, Libya, and Yemen.