Updated February 10, 2017 11:36:02
US President Donald Trump tweeted "SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!" shortly after a US federal appeals court unanimously upheld a temporary suspension of his order restricting travel from seven Muslim-majority countries.
Today's ruling came in a challenge to Mr Trump's order filed by the states of Washington and Minnesota — the Justice Department said it was reviewing the decision and considering its options.
Mr Trump's January 27 executive order barred entry for citizens from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days and imposed a 120-day halt on all refugees, except refugees from Syria who are barred indefinitely.
Who's affected by the travel ban?
- Firstly, Mr Trump signed the executive order on January 27
- It barred travellers from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen from entering the US for 90 days
- It also stopped all refugees from entering the country for 120 days
- Except refugees from Syria — they've been banned indefinitely
- Green-card holders had been stopped during the first weekend of the order. Since then, the White House has said those residents wouldn't be affected moving forward
But last Friday, US District Judge James Robart suspended Mr Trump's executive order.
The ruling —which follows a hearing on the case on Tuesday — does not resolve the lawsuit, but relates instead to whether Mr Trump's order should be suspended while litigation proceeds.
"It's a political decision," Mr Trump told reporters who gathered outside his press secretary's office, adding he did not view the ruling as a major setback for his White House.
"This is just a decision that came down, but we're going to win the case," he said.
In the ruling, the appeals panel said the government presented no evidence to explain the urgent need for the executive order to take effect immediately — but the judges noted compelling public interests on both sides.
"On the one hand, the public has a powerful interest in national security and in the ability of an elected president to enact policies," the court said.
"And on the other, the public also has an interest in free flow of travel, in avoiding separation of families, and in freedom from discrimination."
"There is no precedent to support this claimed un-reviewability, which runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy," the court said.
US Supreme Court expected to determine final outcome
Two members of the three-judge panel were appointed by former Democratic Presidents Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama, and one was appointed by former Republican President George W Bush.
The government could ask the entire 9th Circuit court to review the decision "en banc" or appeal directly to the US Supreme Court.
But the three judges said the states had shown that even temporary reinstatement of the ban would cause harm.
The US Supreme Court will likely determine the case's final outcome.
Curbing entry to the United States as a national security measure was a central premise of Mr Trump's 2016 presidential campaign, originally proposed as a temporary ban on all Muslims.
US presidents have in the past claimed sweeping powers to fight terrorism, but individuals, states and civil rights groups challenging the ban said his administration had offered no evidence it answered a threat.
More to come.
AP/Reuters
First posted February 10, 2017 10:17:31
0 comments :
Post a Comment