Anti-Trump decision upheld by appeal court

 Ban on travellers

Court says Muslims from seven countries can enter US as usual; US president terms decision disgraceful, vows to see it in SC

WASHINGTON: A federal appeals court rejecting the government appeal refused on Friday to reinstate President Donald Trump’s ban on travelers from seven predominantly Muslim nations, dealing another legal setback to the new administration’s immigration policy.

In a unanimous decision, the panel of three judges from the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals declined to block a lower court ruling that suspended the ban and allowed previously barred travelers to enter the US. An appeal to the US Supreme Court is possible.

The court rejected the administration’s claim that it did not have the authority to review the president’s executive order.“There is no precedent to support this claimed unreviewability which runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy,” the court said.

The judges noted that the states had raised serious allegations about religious discrimination.US President Donald Trump denounced as “disgraceful” on Friday an appellate court’s decision blocking his order barring US entry to refugees and nationals from seven predominantly Muslim countries.

Trump reacted to Thursday´s unanimous decision by the US court of appeals based in San Francisco in an early morning tweet that selectively quoted from a post on Lawfare, a blog on law and national security issues.

The blog post found it “remarkable” that the appellate panel “did not even bother to cite” a key US legal statute that authorizes the president to suspend entry to the United States of all or any class of aliens he deems detrimental to US interests.

After quoting the Lawfare passage in his tweet, Trump declared the appellate court’s conclusion: “A disgraceful decision!”Trump neglected to say, however, that the blog goes on to conclude that the appellate court reached the correct decision in upholding a lower court judge’s suspension of the ban.

Lawfare said the decision was right “for the simple reason that there is no cause to plunge the country into turmoil again while the courts address the merits of these matters over the next few weeks.”

The case is seen as likely to be appealed to the Supreme Court, although it could go back for further review in the lower courts.Following news of the ruling, Trump tweeted, “See you in the Supreme Court, the security of our nation is at stake.”

US District Judge James Robart in Seattle issued a temporary restraining order halting the ban last week after Washington state and Minnesota sued. The ban temporarily suspended the nation’s refugee programme andimmigration from countries that had raised terrorism concerns.

Justice Department lawyers appealed to the 9th Circuit arguing that the president had the constitutional power to restrict entry to the United States and that the courts could not second guess his determination that such a step was needed to prevent terrorism.

The states said Trump’s travel ban harmed individuals’ businesses and universities. Citing Trump’s campaign promise to stop Muslims from entering the US, they said the ban unconstitutionally blocked entry to people based on religion.

Both sides faced tough questioning during an hour of arguments on Tuesday conducted by phone an unusual step and broadcast live on cable networks, newspaper websites and social media. It attracted a huge audience.

The judges hammered away at the administration’s claim that the ban was motivated by terrorism fears but they also challenged the states argument that it targeted the Muslims.

“I have trouble understanding why we’re supposed to infer religious animus when in fact the vast majority of the Muslims would not be affected,” Judge Richard Clifton, a George W Bush nominee asked an attorney representing Washington state and Minnesota.