Profile image
By 21st Century Wire
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views

Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:

Trump’s Travel Ban Halt Upheld by 9th Circuit Court

Thursday, February 9, 2017 17:24
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

21st Century Wire says…

Today the 9th Circuit Court of appeals has ruled to uphold the halt on allowing enforcement of President Trump’s Executive Order banning travel from seven countries in the Middle East. Even as the mainstream media is touting it as a ‘win’ for left wing activists and the democrats who have their heels dug in against ‘all things Trump,’ many readers will find that it is not much of a surprise to hear that the case will be headed to a further round of appeals.

It may be difficult for the courts to continue holding up this stay against the Executive Order as their primary argument is that the order is a ‘Muslim ban.’ Anyone who’s read the actual Executive Order Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the US will find it fairly clear that there is no such language in the EO. RT explores this breaking news further in the report below with some embedded commentary from Lionel Media.

Screenshot 2017-02-09 17.41.38

The restraining order on enforcement of the travel ban on seven countries has been upheld unanimously by a three-judge panel of the US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The case will likely continue to be appealed until it reaches the Supreme Court.

“We hold that the government has not shown a likelihood of success on the merits of its appeal, nor has it shown that failure to enter a stay would cause irreparable injury, and we therefore deny its emergency motion for a stay,” the appeals court’s decision said.

Government lawyers were put to the test by the three-judge panel, arguing in favor of enforcing the travel ban while litigation over it is ongoing.

The 9th Circuit Court was not ruling on whether the order was constitutional or not. The issue at hand was whether it would be enforced while legal challenges made their way through the judicial system.

Large parts of the executive order had been suspended by US District Judge James L. Robart in Seattle, who incurred President Trump’s fury on Twitter. Trump called him a “so-called judge” who “opens up our country to potential terrorists” and puts the country in “peril.”

The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 4, 2017

Because the ban was lifted by a judge, many very bad and dangerous people may be pouring into our country. A terrible decision

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 4, 2017

Trump’s gripes with the judicial branch of government were echoed by DOJ lawyer August E. Flentje. When asked on Tuesday by Judge Michelle T. Friedland whether he was arguing “that the president’s decision in that regard is unreviewable,” Flentje responded in the affirmative.

Washington Solicitor General Noah Purcell, who also represented Minnesota, seemed to express similar feelings when he argued to keep the travel ban in place by telling the appeals court that if they did not “abdicate” their check on the executive branch, they would “throw the country back into chaos.

The three judges also argued amongst themselves over whether or not the travel ban on seven predominantly Muslim countries constituted a Muslim ban. Judge Richard Clifton argued that the countries affected by the executive order “encompass only a relatively small percentage of Muslims.

I have trouble understanding we’re supposed to infer religious animus,” he said.

Washington State argued against the DOJ and claimed that the ban was based on religion after former Trump advisor, Rudy Giuliani, claimed on Fox News that Trump had asked him how to pass a legal Muslim ban.

Wash.: Well, the Pres called for complete bans on Muslims entering the country. That’s what adviser said on TV. #WAvTrump

— Brian Goldman (@briangoldman) February 7, 2017

Wash.: We can infer animus from public statements of Pres and top advisers — intent to ban Muslims. #WAvTrump

— Brian Goldman (@briangoldman) February 7, 2017

Washington also cited the many lawful permanent residents who were impacted by the executive order, some of whom were detained in airports after trying to reenter the country legally. While the executive order has since been rewritten to exclude lawful permanent residents, Washington argued that it was a sign of “bad faith.

Wash.: Cases say you can look behind order to find motives where there are allegations of bad faith, which we have here. #WAvTrump

— Brian Goldman (@briangoldman) February 7, 2017

The ruling was nearly guaranteed to be appealed up to the Supreme Court from the get-go…

Continue this report at RT

READ MORE TRUMP NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Trump Files


21st Century Wire is an alternative news agency designed to enlighten, inform and educate readers about world events which are not always covered in the mainstream media.



We encourage you to Share our Reports, Analyses, Breaking News and Videos. Simply Click your Favorite Social Media Button and Share.

Report abuse


Your Comments
Question Razz Sad Evil Exclaim Smile Redface Biggrin Surprised Eek Confused Cool LOL Mad Twisted Rolleyes Wink Idea Arrow Neutral Cry Mr. Green

Top Stories
Recent Stories



Top Global

Top Alternative



Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.