Sides argue travel ban
Judges hammer away at U.S. government’s arguments that states can’ t challenge order
SAN FRANCISCO — A panel of appeals court judges reviewing U.S. President Donald Trump’s travel ban hammered away Tuesday at the federal government’s arguments that the states cannot challenge the order.
The hearing before the San Francisco-based 9 th Circuit Court of Appeals judges was the greatest legal challenge yet to the ban, which has upended travel to the U.S. and tested the new administration’s use of executive power.
The government asked the court to restore Trump’ s order, con tending that the president alone has the power to decide who can enter or stay in the U.S. But several states have fought the ban on travellers from seven predominantly Muslim nations and insisted that it is unconstitutional.
The judges — two Democratic appointees and one Republican — repeatedly questioned Justice Department lawyer August Fl entje on why the states should not be able to sue on behalf of their residents or on behalf of their universities, which have complained about students and faculty getting stranded overseas.
When Flentje suggested that individuals might be able to sue, rather than the state, Judge Michelle Fried land asked whether there would be any point in waiting for individuals to come forward rather than considering the merits of the case brought by the states.
Circuit Judge Michelle T. Friedland asked whether the gov- ernment has any evidence connecting the seven predominantly Muslim nations covered by the ban to terrorism.
Flentje said the government is aware of some foreign nationals who have been arrested in the U.S. since Sept. 11, but he did not give details of the evidence. He also said president has broad power to enforce national security.
The court was not expected to rule immediately, with a decision more likely to come later this week, court spokesman David Madden said.
Whatever the court eventually decides, either side could ask the Supreme Court to intervene.
U.S. District Judge James Rob art in Seattle, who on Friday temporarily blocked Trump’s order, has said a judge’s job is to ensure that an action taken by the government “comports with our country’s laws.”
Trump said Tuesday that he can’ t believe his administration has to fight in the court stoup hold his refugee and immigration ban, a policy he says will protect the country.
“And a lot of people agree with us, believe me ,” Trump said at aroundtable discussion with members of the National Sheriff’ s Association. “If those people ever protested, you’d see a real protest. But they want to see our borders secure and our country secure.”
Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly told lawmakers that the order likely should have been delayed at least long enough to brief Congress about it.
The filing with the appeals court was the latest salvo in a high-stakes legal fight surrounding Trump’s order, which temporarily suspends the country’ s refugee program and immigration from seven countries with terrorism concerns.
Washington state, Minnesota and other states say the appellate court should allow a temporary restraining order blocking the travel ban to stand as their lawsuit moves through the legal system.
The appeals court over the weekend refused to immediately re-instate the ban, and lawyers for Washington and Minnesota argued a new on Monday that any resumption would “unleash chaos again ,” separating families and stranding university students.