Appeals Court Judges Play Hardball Over Trump Ban
Lawyers for the federal government and the states of Washington and Minnesota squared off Tuesday over the president’s suspended executive order—in a fight observers say is likely headed to the Supreme Court.
BETSY WOODRUFF
02.08.17 1:15 AM ET
On Tuesday afternoon in San Francisco, a Justice Department lawyer argued hard that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals should reinstate President Trump’s travel ban—or, barring that, just reinstate most of it.
It was the latest court skirmish over Trump’s most controversial move yet: an executive order banning travelers from seven majority-Muslim countries from entering the United States. And if the oral arguments that took place before the appeals court on Tuesday are any indicator, it’s a legal battle that’s far from over, with stakes that are sky-high and an outcome that’s far from predetermined.
This all started late in the day on Friday, Jan. 27, when the president signed the executive order and kicked off a weekend of chaos at international airports around the country. Refugees and other travelers who had been in the air when Trump signed the order found themselves locked out of the country, and panicking lawyers rushed to major U.S. airports in hopes of helping those travelers get into the U.S.—and keeping them from signing away their rights in the process.
Immigrant and civil rights groups went straight to court, and by the evening of Jan. 28, multiple federal judges around the country had sent down orders limiting the reach of the executive order (and, in one case, requiring that lawyers be allowed access to travelers detained at Dulles Airport—access volunteer lawyers told The Daily Beast they never got).
more
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/02/08/inside-the-appeals-court-battle-over-trump-s-travel-ban.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
