Federal appeals court maintains suspension of Trump’s immigration order

A federal appeals court has maintained the freeze on President Trump’s controversial immigration order, meaning previously barred refugees and citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries can continue entering the U.S.

A panel with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upheld the ruling of U.S. District Judge James Robart, who had decided Friday that Trump’s temporary travel ban should be put on hold. The Department of Homeland Security soon suspended all enforcement of Trump’s controversial directive.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/federal-appeals-court-maintains-suspension-of-trumps-immigration-order/2017/02/09/e8526e70-ed47-11e6-9662-6eedf1627882_story.html?pushid=breaking-news_1486682050&tid=notifi_push_breaking-news&utm_term=.17d411588c48

Unanimous lol

Cue the tweets from Trump in 3...2...1...

Trump must be just fuming right now. I wish I could have been there just to see the expression on his ugly mug when he heard the news. Well played judicial system in putting this demagogue in his place.

This excerpt is interesting:

"The Supreme Court, though, remains one justice short, and many see it as ideologically split 4-4. A tie would keep in place whatever the appeals court decides."

How many people think this would be split along ideological lines? I'm assuming the author thinks that the traditional R leaning judges would side with Trump, but based on the rationale stated in the article:

“The Government does not merely argue that courts owe substantial deference to the immigration and national security policy determinations of the political branches — an uncontroversial principle that is well-grounded in our jurisprudence. Instead, the Government has taken the position that the President’s decisions about immigration policy, particularly when motivated by national security concerns, are unreviewable, even if those actions potentially contravene constitutional rights and protections ... There is no precedent to support this claimed unreviewability, which runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy.”

how likely is that?

Court has the final say.

Not surprised.

Executive order banning immigration from listed countries....

....unless they were literally anything other than Muslim.

End result? Defacto Muslim ban. Trump's past statements didn't even matter at that point. It ended up being a religious ban, at least from the listed countries.

Good.

You know, if he had properly briefed all departments on the roll out of this thing, it might have actually held up. Maybe this experience will give him a better understanding of how government works. You can't just throw an order out of nowhere and yell, "Make it happen"! This is the White House, not The Apprentice.

Along with the absurdly overt abstinence from banning any of the more extreme Muslim countries that he has business with. It's beyond Nixon, even, and we are not even a month into his term. Insanity.

I cannot see the Supreme Court going through and reimposing the ban.

ISIS: "Yes!"

Trump's crying is priceless. Papa Putin will not be pleased.

@hillelslovak:

I agree, there's simply no way the Supreme Court will overturn this ruling.

I'm not sure about the current court. Roberts and Kennedy could swing, but I'm not betting the farm one way or the other. Ironically, Gorsuch would probably side with the 9th Circuit based on what I know about him.

No amount of planning on his cabinet's part could remedy the absurdity of the ban itself. He clearly committed massive corruption in exclusion of the states he has ties with, and clearly violated the establishment clause of the first amendment. He is not nearly as good as he thinks he is, at anything, and this case will most likely be a testament to this fact, along with his paranoid delusions, even when there is a real problem that demands serious, thoughtful action.

@judaspete: I'm not even looking at the traditional swing justices. Let's take the late Scalia, for example, since he was one of the more outspoken of the bunch.

Given the argument put forth by the lawyers, could you see Scalia arguing that an executive order by the president (even under the relatively narrow constraints argued) is unreviewable by the courts?

That seems like the kind of argument that ALL of the justices would bristle at.

To reiterate the relevant excerpt from the decision: "Instead, the Government has taken the position that the President’s decisions about immigration policy, particularly when motivated by national security concerns, are unreviewable, even if those actions potentially contravene constitutional rights and protections ."

I have to admit, I was pleasantly surprised.

Good for freedom and liberty.

lol at Trump and his band of trumpettes.

@mattbbpl: Hopefully you are right.

I love it. I LOVE it. **** you, Trump. Go throw your typical tantrum and tweets. At least for the time being.....sit and spin.

Political ruling, Cya in court!

Great to see sanity is still prevailing.

Oh god I can't wait till I see the orange baboon tweet when the court over rules it

lovers of the constitution: "yes!"

Actually ISIS liked the ban.....good recruitment tool for them.

As it should have. It not only banned people from entering the country but if you had a legal visa or other documentation that allowed you to enter the country you were banned regardless. The ban was unconstitutional no matter how you look at it. I hope this doesn't go to court but at the same time I hope it does. Someone has to get Donald and his cabinet members to see the folly of this executive order.