Who are 3 judges who heard arguments on Trump travel ban?
- Author: Zachary Reyes May 23, 2017,
May 23, 2017, 17:13
Trump's travel ban - key sections of which have been frozen by two courts - tried to temporarily shut down the USA refugee program and suspend the issuance of new visas to residents of six Muslim-majority countries.
One week later, the Justice Department told the court that the Trump administration would revise the ban rather than continue to appeal the Seattle judge's injunction. The judge called the evidence of animus "significant and unrebutted".
This is the second time the 9th Circuit has been tasked with deciding the immediate fate of the President's travel ban.
On Monday, three 9 Circuit Court judges held an hour-long televised hearing to weigh the constitutionality of Trump's travel ban, questioning the lawyer defending the ban and pressing the Justice Department to explain why it should be deemed legal.
Wall said that "no one has ever attempted to set aside" a "neutral" law based on "campaign-trail comments".
A group of protesters rallied outside the courtroom in Seattle, waving signs with slogans such as "No ban, no wall" and "The ban is still racist". If the travel ban is to be upheld, Wall suggested, it should be because presidents are owed a "presumption of regularity".
Judge Ronald Gould noted, "The executive order sets out national security justifications. United States", a disastrous Supreme Court decision that justified the internment of Japanese Americans in camps during World War II on the reasoning the government said there was a risk some might be spies for the Japanese government, and this threat outweighed their individual rights. The ruling is now widely considered regrettable.
"Why not? "Facially legitimate" - that's all you say!"
"I'm not familiar with all the ins and outs of that executive order", Wall replied.
Paez also questioned Katyal about Trump's statements, calling them "profound". An executive order signed by Trump in January decreased the refugee limit from 110,000 to 50,000 this fiscal year, but the cap was not blocked in court until mid-March.
But "he could not actually point to any disavowal", Katyal later pointed out, "because the truth is there is no such statement".
The three-judge panel from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had tough questions for each side.
The 9th Circuit blocked Trump's first travel ban, though the revised version is before a different panel.
The federal appeals court, which had scheduled arguments Monday morning over Hawaii's lawsuit challenging the travel ban, was the second panel in a week to consider the matter - last week, judges on the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments over whether to uphold a Maryland judge's ruling that put Trump's proposed ban on the back burner.
"We don't know what the result is going to be, but what I see happening in this process is that the system is working", said Hawaii's Attorney General Doug Chin following the hearing. "Again, he must be checked".
Katyal allowed, though, that the president would not be forever barred from issuing a similar executive order, if he were to repudiate his previous comments or take other actions to prove that his intent was not to discriminate. "Islam is peace." With Trump "we get, quote, Islam hates us", Katyal said.
"There's no guarantee that the 13 4th Circuit judges who heard argument last week will hand down their ruling before the three 9th Circuit judges hearing Monday's argument will", said Steve Vladeck, CNN legal analyst and professor of law at the University of Texas School of Law.