Trump’s travel ban faces tough scrutiny in court

Asserting that President Trump was within his constitutional rights and obligations to sign the executive order that temporarily bans immigration from seven Muslim majority countries, the Justice Department urged court of appeals to reinstate the travel ban — put on hold by the courts last week. 

During the hour-long hearing, conducted by phone, before a three-judge panel of the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals, the Justice Department lawyer August Flentje said in signing the executive order Trump struck the balance between national security and the practice of allowing people from entering the country. The lawyer urged the San Francisco court to remove the halt on the executive order by a court in Seattle. Flentje’s assertion led to a series of rapid fire exchanges with all three judges pressing him to explain the limits of his position. “Has the government pointed to any evidence connecting these countries with terrorism,” asked Judge Michelle Friedland. 

Another judge Willian Canby asked if the President could simply say the US will not admit Muslims into the countries. “Thats not the order. This is a far  cry from that situation,” Flentje replied. But said that a US citizen with a connection to someone seeking entry might be able to challenge the executive order if that were the case. 

The Court of Appeals is expected to give its verdict soon. The case is likely to hit the Supreme Court in coming days. 

Trump’s executive order barred entry to all refugees for 120 days, and to travellers from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days.