Arguments over Trump’s travel ban conclude

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Arguments over President Donald Trump’s executive order on immigration have concluded in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The final minutes of the hearing were largely devoted to whether the travel ban was intended to discriminate against Muslims. Judge Richard Clifton wanted to know how the order could be considered discriminatory if it potentially affected only 15 percent of the world’s Muslims, according to his calculations.

In response, Washington state Solicitor General Noah Purcell argued that it’s remarkable to have this much evidence of discriminatory intent this early in the case. He mentioned Trump’s campaign statements about a Muslim ban and public statements from adviser Rudy Giuliani that he was asked to help devise a legal version of the Muslim ban.

A Justice Department lawyer argued that the courts shouldn’t question the president’s authority over national security based on newspaper articles. But under questioning from Clifton he conceded that he doesn’t dispute that the statements were made.

The judges were hearing from the U.S. government and several states that oppose the ban on travelers from seven predominantly Muslim nations.

A court spokesman says it was unlikely that the court would issue a ruling Tuesday.

A federal judge temporarily blocked Trump’s order last week. Washington state, Minnesota and other states say the appeals court should allow the temporary restraining order to stand as their lawsuit moves through the legal system.

The government is asking the court to restore Trump’s executive order, contending that the president alone has the power to decide who can enter or stay in the United States.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

2 comments

  • RG

    The court should not consider the need for the travel order. The only thing the court should rule on is whether President Trump has the legal authority to issue the executive order.

  • Little Mary

    Judge Friedland is priceless! “Any evidence connecting the seven predominantly Muslim nations covered by the ban to terrorism.” AP is almost as incredulous as the Caliphate News Network.