Live
Audio Only
The U.S. Department of Justice filed a brief Monday stating that last week's suspension of Trump's order by a federal judge was too broad and "at most" should be limited to people who were already granted entry to the country and were temporarily abroad, or to those who want to leave and return to the United States.
RELATED:
Trump Denounces Judge Who Lifted 'Muslim Ban,' Vows Battle
The 9th Circuit Court in San Francisco Monday asked lawyers for the states of Washington and Minnesota and the Justice Department to argue whether the ban should remain shelved. The court set oral arguments for 3 p.m., local time, Tuesday on President Donald Trump's temporary travel ban on people from seven Muslim-majority countries.
Friday's ruling by U.S. District Judge James Robart in Seattle suspending the travel ban opened a window for people from the seven affected countries to enter the country.
Trump faces an uphill battle in the San Francisco court, which is dominated by liberal-leaning judges. Appeals courts are generally leery of upending the status quo, which in this case is the lower court's suspension of the ban.
The appeals court was focusing on the narrow question of whether the district court had grounds to put the order on hold. The bigger legal fight over whether Trump had authority to issue the order will be addressed later in the litigation.
Opponents of the travel ban say the 90-day ban is illegal, barring entry for citizens from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen and imposing a 120-day halt to all refugees.
Ten former U.S. national security and foreign policy officials, who served under both Republican and Democratic presidents, filed a declaration in the court case arguing that the travel ban served no national security purposes.
RELATED:
Trump Fires Acting Attorney General After Row over Travel Ban
It was signed by former secretaries of state John Kerry and Madeleine Albright, former national security adviser Susan Rice and former CIA Directors Michael Hayden and Michael Morell.
Over the weekend, the San Francisco court denied the administration's request for an immediate suspension of the federal judge's temporary restraining order that blocked the implementation of key parts of the travel ban while it considered the government's request in full.
The court did say it would consider the government's request after receiving more information.
Trump has reacted to challenges to the ban by attacking the federal judge in Seattle and then the wider court system.
On a visit Monday to the military's Central Command headquarters in Tampa, Florida, Trump defended his order.
"Radical Islamic terrorists are determined to strike our homeland as they did on 9/11," he said. “We need strong programs for people who love our country,” Trump said, adding he did not want to allow "people who want to destroy us and destroy our country" into the United States.
Opponents of the ban received far more filings in support of their position than the Justice Department. Washington state's challenge was backed by about a dozen friends-of-the-court briefs submitted by at least 17 state attorneys general, more than 100 companies and about a dozen labor and civil rights groups. About a dozen conservative groups supported the government in three such briefs.
Top technology companies, including Apple Inc, Google Inc and Microsoft Corp were among the corporations that filed a similar brief Sunday with the appeals court, arguing the travel ban "inflicts significant harm on American business, innovation, and growth." Elon Musk's energy products company Tesla Inc and SpaceX joined the brief on Monday.
Newsletter
