For the second time in four months, a San Francisco-based federal appeals court on Monday rejected President Donald Trump's order to cut off U.S.travel for immigrants from six largely Muslim countries in the Middle East and Africa.
Today's decision by a unanimous three-judge 9th Circuit panel helps keep the travel ban blocked, saying the administration violated federal immigration law and failed to provide a valid reason for the ban.
A U.S. appeals court has upheld a decision blocking President Donald Trump's revised "travel ban" on people from six mainly Muslim nations.
In March, U.S. District Judge Derrick Watson blocked two key portions of the executive order, the first suspending the entry of individuals from six Muslim-majority countries and the second suspending the refugee program, then halving the number of refugees allowed in the country.
The key part of the executive order suspended travel from six predominantly Muslim countries for 90 days to give the administration time to conduct a review of its vetting procedures.
In a ruling later Monday, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also faulted the travel ban and upheld a judge's ruling that blocked the temporary ban on refugees as well.
The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit kept in place a lower court injunction on the ban, arguing the president had overstepped his authority and his executive order discriminated against travelers based on their nationality. "The Justice Dept. should have stayed with the original Travel Ban, not the watered down, politically correct version they submitted to S.C.", the president wrote on Twitter.More news: Twins draft California prep shortstop Royce Lewis at No. 1
The administration has said the travel ban is needed to prevent terrorism in the US. Trump described the order, which replaced an earlier January 27 order that also was blocked by courts, as a "watered down, politically correct" version of his original plan.
US President Donald Trump has not given up on reinstating his 90-day travel ban.
A provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act passed in 1952 gives the President the ability to exclude certain classes of foreigners if he makes a finding that their entry would be "detrimental" to the United States; another provision, passed in 1965, says that national origin itself can not be a basis for discrimination in the issuance of immigrant visas.
But if the conservative majority on the Supreme Court is inclined to stay within the "four corners" of the executive order's text and not broadly consider the motivation behind it, the 9th Circuit shows it still can not be upheld.
The Fourth Circuit Court's decision is on appeal to the Supreme Court.
The San Francisco court held that Trump's order went against the existing immigration laws in the US. In fact, the President called upon leaders in the Muslim world to join the United States in protecting religious freedom for all, including the freedom to be free from violence and terror.
Because of the conflict with immigration law, the judges said they didn't need to consider whether it also violated the Constitution's prohibition on the government favoring or disfavoring any religion.