Appeals court to weigh challenge to revised Trump travel ban


If one of the circuit courts rules for the government before the other has decided, the travel ban would still remained blocked because a circuit court does not supersede a district court from a different jurisdiction.

Although it does not explicitly mention Muslims, US District Judge Theodore Chuang of Maryland accepted arguments that Trump's history of anti-Muslim rhetoric presented "a convincing case" that the second executive decree amounted to "the realization of the long-envisioned Muslim ban".

Among the nominees are two who were on the President's campaign short list for the Supreme Court - Michigan Supreme Court Justice Joan Larsen, who will be nominated to the 6th Circuit, and Minnesota Supreme Court Justice David Stras, who will be nominated to the 8th Circuit.

CNN said that former Presidents Bill ClintonBill ClintonTrump admin heading to court Monday on travel ban: report Hillary Clinton gets standing ovation after shoutout at Barbra Streisand concert Interior: 27 national monuments could lose designation MORE or Barack ObamaBarack ObamaTrump admin heading to court Monday on travel ban: report Ivanka to tour Trump administration, focusing on working families, women Regulations, farmers and the law MORE appointed 10 of the 15 active judges on the court. She also served in the U.S. Justice Department when George W. Bush was president.

Now, nine judges are Democratic appointees - including six from Obama - and five judges are Republican appointees. But while a revised ban was later released, that too was blocked by the courts.

The ACLU and National Immigration Law Center brought the case on behalf of several organizations, as well as people who live in the USA and fear the executive order will prevent them from being reunited with family members from the banned countries.

President Donald Trump's revised travel ban targeting six Muslim-majority countries is about to be scrutinized by a federal appeals court for the first time.

The suit in front of the 4th Circuit on Monday was brought by several refugee rights organizations, along with individual plaintiffs who claim the executive order, if allowed to go into effect, would separate them from loved ones overseas. 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.

Cristiano Ronaldo as good as Pele and George Best, says Phil Neville
However, following the first leg of the semi-final Ronaldo spoke of his frustration regarding his treatment. It was his easiest goal of the night, he controlled Lucas Vazquez's cross, then fired home.

Chuang went on to explain that the consideration of such evidence by a federal court is a matter of "common sense", as such "explicit statements of a religious goal are "readily discoverable facts" that allow the court to identify the objective of this government action without resort to 'judicial psychoanalysis'".

The administration counters that Chuang abused his discretion in basing his decision on statements Trump made during the 2016 race as a private citizen.

As a result, the crux of the issue on appeal is likely whether the 4th Circuit agrees it is permissible to look outside of the four corners of the executive order to examine its goal.

Lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union, representing the challengers, said in court papers that Trump's comments before the election can not be ignored.

If the Trump administration wins in the 4th Circuit, will the ban immediately go back into effect?


While the Trump administration wants the court to act quickly, it will likely be weeks before the judges issue their written decision. Yet Watson's decision was slightly broader in scope and paused Trump's 120-day ban on refugee admissions as well.

The lawsuit said the order violates federal immigration law and a section of the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment that prohibits government discrimination on the basis of religion.

If Trump prevails in both cases, the US can temporarily halt issuance of visas to people from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.