U.S. appeals court upholds suspension of Trump travel ban

[webfact]

U.S. appeals court upholds suspension of Trump travel ban

By Daniel Levine

REUTERS

 

Ann Carey protests outside the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals courthouse in San Francisco, California February 7, 2017. REUTERS/Noah Berger

 

(Reuters) - A U.S. federal appeals court on Thursday unanimously upheld a temporary suspension of President Donald Trump's order that restricted travel from seven Muslim-majority countries.

 

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling came in a challenge to Trump's order filed by the states of Washington and Minnesota. The U.S. Supreme Court will likely determine the case's final outcome.

 

The White House said it had no immediate comment.

 

Trump's Jan. 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.

 

U.S. District Judge James Robart suspended Trump's order last Friday.

 

The ruling from the 9th Circuit, which follows a hearing on the case on Tuesday, does not resolve the lawsuit, but relates instead to whether Trump's order should be suspended while litigation proceeds.

 

Two members of three-judge panel that ruled were appointed by former Democratic Presidents Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama, and one was appointed by former President George W. Bush.

 

Either side could decide to appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.

 

Trump had said the order was vital for national safety and criticized Robart, the Seattle judge, for suspending it.

 

Critics have called Trump's ban discriminatory against Muslims and have questioned its value as a security measure. National security veterans, major U.S. technology companies and law enforcement officials from more than a dozen states backed a legal effort against the ban.

 

Ultimately the courts will have to address questions about the extent of the president's power on matters of immigration and national security. Traditionally, judges have been extremely cautious about stepping on the executive branch’s authority in such matters, legal experts say, though some note that the implementation of this order presents unique issues.

 

INTENSE SCRUTINY

 

The appeals court panel subjected Trump's order to intense scrutiny during Tuesday's oral argument.[nL1N1FS03X]

 

During the oral argument, the judges asked a government lawyer whether the Trump administration's national security argument was backed by evidence that people from the seven countries posed a danger.

 

Judge Richard Clifton posed equally tough questions for an attorney representing Minnesota and Washington. Clifton asked if Robart's suspension of Trump's policy was "overbroad." Clifton is an appointee of former President George W. Bush, a Republican like Trump.

 

August Flentje, representing the Trump administration as special counsel for the U.S. Justice Department, told the panel on Tuesday that "Congress has expressly authorized the president to suspend entry of categories of aliens" for national security reasons.

 

"That’s what the president did here," he said.

 

When the 9th Circuit asked Flentje what evidence the executive order had used to connect the seven countries affected by the order with terrorism in the United States, Flentje said the "proceedings have been moving very fast," without giving specific examples.

 

He said both Congress and the previous administration of Democrat Barack Obama had determined that those seven countries posed the greatest risk of terrorism and had in the past put stricter visa requirements on them.

 

Noah Purcell, solicitor general for the state of Washington, began his argument urging the court to serve "as a check on executive abuses."

 

Curbing entry to the United States as a national security measure was a central premise of Trump's 2016 presidential campaign, originally proposed as a temporary ban on all Muslims. He has voiced frustration at the legal challenge to his order.

 

"I actually can't believe that we're having to fight to protect the security, in a court system, to protect the security of our nation," he said at an event with sheriffs on Tuesday.

 

U.S. 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.

 

(Reporting by Daniel Levine; Editing by Peter Cooney)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-02-10

[Somtamnication]

Please resign. Mr. Trump. Get Arnold in that office. 

[WaywardWind]

The decision was unanimous.

 

Full decision here:

 

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2017/02/09/17-35105.pdf

 

Trump will go on a rampage cursing out the judiciary, and in doing so will poison the appeal to the Supreme Court which is sure to follow this decision.

[ezzra]

 

This presidency position become a mockery whereby people have elected

 a president and strait away are putting obstacles in his to preform his

duties and vision of a better America and all in the name and under the guise

of righteousness....

[GinBoy2]

Twitter is as we speak, beefing up bandwidth, trembling, waiting in dreaded anticipation of the forthcoming tweet deluge from Twitter Central, aka the WH Presidential Bedroom.

 

Curious times we live in!

[tx22cb]

These so-called Appeal Justices have made a Yuuuuge mistake. So unfair. I won't say that they are crooked (ha!). They have put American lives in Bigly danger.  They have worse intellects than 8 year-olds.  

Anyway, my travel ban just got 10 months longer, and the crooked media will pay for it.  Very SAD.  

[NanLaew]

29 minutes ago, WaywardWind said:

The decision was unanimous.

 

Full decision here:

 

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2017/02/09/17-35105.pdf

 

Trump will go on a rampage cursing out the judiciary, and in doing so will poison the appeal to the Supreme Court which is sure to follow this decision.

Last night (local time), Fox News was discussing scenarios whereupon if the decision is not unanimous but only 2-1 in favour of maintaining the suspension, the two 'dissenting' 9th Court Justices will need to draft lengthy and compelling legal opinions as to why they upheld the suspension.

 

This morning, in the face of the unanimous 3-0 vote to endorse the suspension, all their toys are completely out of the pram. I guess 29 pages just isn't lengthy and 3 and 0 just isn't compelling enough.

Edited February 10, 2017 by NanLaew

[boomerangutang]

54 minutes ago, Somtamnication said:

Please resign. Mr. Trump. Get Arnold in that office. 

Arnie can't be prez or VP.  Same as me, he wasn't born in the USA.

 

37 minutes ago, ezzra said:

This presidency position become a mockery whereby people have elected a president and strait away are putting obstacles in his to preform his duties and vision of a better America and all in the name and under the guise of righteousness....

       Trump and Bannon are putting obstacles in their own way.  Who wants to repeal Obamacare - with nothing to replace it?  Who wants to further shield the super-rich from paying taxes?  Who wants to cut the balls off the EPA?
 

37 minutes ago, GinBoy2 said:

Twitter is as we speak, beefing up bandwidth, trembling, waiting in dreaded anticipation of the forthcoming tweet deluge from Twitter Central, aka the WH Presidential Bedroom.  Curious times we live in!

Not just the bedroom.  He probably tweets from his golden toilet.

[Caps]

What a complete chopper he is, fancy tweeting 'see you in court', how childish and how not like a President of a so called leading country of the world.  The clown is definitely leading the circus 

[stander]

The Ninth Circuit is the most liberal court in the country, and is the most reversed court in the country. With an 87% reversal rate, these hacks aare obviously incompetent and should be impeached with a record like that.

[boomerangutang]

Just now, stander said:

The Ninth Circuit is the most liberal court in the country, and is the most reversed court in the country. With an 87% reversal rate, these hacks aare obviously incompetent and should be impeached with a record like that.

It's always a sad chuckle to see how right-wingers respond to issues.  I admit, I didn't see this one coming.  Rightists are now planning to denigrate one of the Federal Circuit Courts?  Gimmeabreak!     

Speaking of impeachment.  If Americans voters could vote next week who to impeach:  between 80 and 90% would vote to kick Bannon and Trump out to the sidewalk.  I challenge Trump to call a parliamentary-type confidence vote - ha ha.

[tx22cb]

5 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

...  Nearly every one of Bannon's edicts (signed by Trump) are massively controversial - and entail thousands of hours of taxpayer-paid professionals' time to deal with.  .....and we  haven't yet had to deal with Trump's stupid wall or wars he's itching to start.

There's also the wild goose chase of a huge inquiry into the "3-5 million illegal votes" - strange coincidence that this number is exactly the margin by which Trump lost the popular vote.

[NanLaew]

13 minutes ago, stander said:

The Ninth Circuit is the most liberal court in the country, and is the most reversed court in the country. With an 87% reversal rate, these hacks aare obviously incompetent and should be impeached with a record like that.

straws... clutching...

 

Ar5eholes are puckering because the Supreme Court isn't primed in The Donald's favour yet; the current 4 versus 4 status quo is very perilous ground to take this appeal to.

 

So it will likely go back to Robarts court in WA which will take months of pissing in the wind.

 

The upside of either of these options is that in 3 to 5 months time, we may have a better insight on what this Presidency is really going to offer the American citizens.

[stander]

It will be overturned, in one year 27 out of 28 9th circuit rulings were overturned

[WaywardWind]

20 minutes ago, stander said:

The Ninth Circuit is the most liberal court in the country, and is the most reversed court in the country. With an 87% reversal rate, these hacks aare obviously incompetent and should be impeached with a record like that.

That is simply not accurate. The reversal rates for circuit court decisions are calculated annually, and the Ninth is often in third or fourth place among the circuits.  Additionally, it is extremely unusual for any circuit to have a reversal rate of less than 50% in any year so the starting point is very high. 

 

It is even more dramatic for decisions from state level Supreme Courts - the reversal rates on those decisions are often 100%.

 

Why is this?  Pretty simple, actually. From among the thousands of cases where an appeal to the Supreme Court, approximately 60 are selected by the Court to be heard each year, and a good number of those are ones where there are divergent views among the Circuits. Being that selective, the Court tends to accept cases where they see troubling issues.

[stander]

Judges that refuse to actually follow the law and churn out opinions based on personal preference or political agenda are the very definition of corruption--part of the swamp needing drained.

[WaywardWind]

7 minutes ago, stander said:

It will be overturned, in one year 27 out of 28 9th circuit rulings were overturned

Which year?

 

Your source for this?

[WaywardWind]

3 minutes ago, stander said:

Judges that refuse to actually follow the law and churn out opinions based on personal preference or political agenda are the very definition of corruption--part of the swamp needing drained.

Have you read the opinion? 

 

Where exactly have they refused to follow the law?

 

 

 

[stander]

The president needs to dump these refugees in Washington State. Obama routinely dumped them into heavily conservative areas, obviously to tip the voting balance in those areas. 

[Srikcir]

Remember the case before the courts now is the Temporary Restraining Order on Trump's ban. It is not a court ruling on the merits of the ban. The US Supreme Court is unlikely to accept the ban for review before the case has been fully litigated in the District Court.

 

In the Court of Appeals Record is the government's answer to the Appeal Court's request for evidence of the government's claimed imminent attacks by people from the seven designed countries without the ban - (paraphrasing) the Court has no right to request such evidence as Presidential Orders are "unreviewable" by the courts.

 

The Courts decision says in part that such review is in the court's perview. But the bottom line is that the government's defense based on REAL merits (aka FACTS) was not yet developed. With as a minimum an incomplete court record of the merits of the government's position (vs. substantial evidence by the Defendent the State of Washungton and "Friends of the Court") and no District Court decision, acceptance of review of the Temporary Restraining Order is premature. Denial for review by the USSC automatically sends the legal issue of Trump's ban back to the District Court while sustaining the TRO.

 

Who knows? Maybe the District Court will rule in favor of the government? If not it will issue a Permanent Restraining Order against the ban as it was written in the Presidntial Order. Then that court ruling together with the Court Record can be forwarded to the Appeals process up through the USSC for review.

 

 

[stander]

Judges ruled that TEMPORARY travel ban caused irreparable injury. Something TEMPORARY is NOT irreparable.

[LannaGuy]

U.S. Democrat appeals court upholds suspension of Trump travel ban

 

there that's better... 

Edited February 10, 2017 by LannaGuy

[Roadman]

41 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

straws... clutching...

 

Ar5eholes are puckering because the Supreme Court isn't primed in The Donald's favour yet; the current 4 versus 4 status quo is very perilous ground to take this appeal to.

 

So it will likely go back to Robarts court in WA which will take months of pissing in the wind.

 

The upside of either of these options is that in 3 to 5 months time, we may have a better insight on what this Presidency is really going to offer the American citizens.

I think what most commentators are missing is it is not republican versus democrat appointed judges decisions but as it should be judges ruling on law. If presented in its current format to the Supreme Court then it would no surprise to see it again defeated 8 zip.

[Pib]

I expect Steve Bannon and Kellyanne Conway are in a strategy meeting right now determining Donald''s next move.

 

Donald is too busy to attend the strategy meeting (boring) as he's too busy tweeting hate words at retailers who are dropping his daughter's line of clothing for rich folks.  

[stander]

This ruling only applies to visa holders and other specific categories (green card, refugee card). What happens when these expire? What if State Dept issues no more? What if Trump shuts it all off just to demonstrate his power? 

Courts and Dems hold losing hand. Trump has the Aces.

[boomerangutang]

51 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

straws... clutching...   Ar5eholes are puckering because the Supreme Court isn't primed in The Donald's favour yet; the current 4 versus 4 status quo is very perilous ground to take this appeal to.

So it will likely go back to Robarts court in WA which will take months of pissing in the wind.

The upside of either of these options is that in 3 to 5 months time, we may have a better insight on what this Presidency is really going to offer the American citizens.

In 3 to 5 months, Trump will be hiding in a dark room, with Bannon standing guard at the closed door, much like Nixon hid away from the world. The only difference between Nixon and Trump is; Nixon sucked bourbon all day, whereas Trump has his twitter account.  Oh, and Nixon knew how to be a gentleman in mixed company.  

 

47 minutes ago, watgate said:

I hope tons of terrorists enter the US and create all sorts of death and destruction and then maybe the libtards and mindless leftist wackos will finally wake up to the reality of the world, although I doubt it because they are hellbent on destroying the US.

You sound like the guy in the trailer park who buys the most powerful shotgun possible, and then sits in a dark corner for hours, facing the door,  hoping a robber will break in, so he can blow his head off.

 

You can call me a childish name like 'libtard' (you've learned well from 'The Divider' about calling names), but that won't keep me from hoping The Dufus In Chief will step down, for the good of America.  Everyone else has realized, even Fox News blowhards, that Trump spells big trouble for everything he touches.   Midas has the 'Midas touch' which turned everything to gold.   Trump has the 'Trump touch' which turns everything putrid.

[pitrevie]

1 hour ago, tx22cb said:

These so-called Appeal Justices have made a Yuuuuge mistake. So unfair. I won't say that they are crooked (ha!). They have put American lives in Bigly danger.  They have worse intellects than 8 year-olds.  

Anyway, my travel ban just got 10 months longer, and the crooked media will pay for it.  Very SAD.  

And all these so called judges are probably from Mexico or have been on holiday there.

[Pib]

2 minutes ago, stander said:

This ruling only applies to visa holders and other specific categories (green card, refugee card). What happens when these expire? What if State Dept issues no more? What if Trump shuts it all off just to demonstrate his power? 

Courts and Dems hold losing hand. Trump has the Aces.

 

Kids of Far Right Republicans agree with you.

 

[sirineou]

54 minutes ago, watgate said:

I hope tons of terrorists enter the US and create all sorts of death and destruction and then maybe the libtards and mindless leftist wackos will finally wake up to the reality of the world, although I doubt it because they are hellbent on destroying the US.

you hope "all sorts of death and destruction " fallen upon your fellow Americans so that you can say I told you so??

 

[Srikcir]

34 minutes ago, stander said:

This ruling only applies to visa holders and other specific categories

No.

The ruling applies to the ENTIRE order.

Trump can choose to re-write the order or amend the order in hopes of making it more likely to pass judicial review. But he might view such action as a defeat and Trump never loses! He has indicated he'll go forward on the current order - double down.