Candidate Donald Trump's calls for a ban on Muslim immigration are at the heart of a challenge to his revised executive order restricting travel, to be considered Monday by a federal appeals court.
Is the 4th Circuit a liberal or conservative court? . The legal and political stakes in the case are high. That usually happens a few times a year.
And for the first time in the court's history the arguments will be broadcast live, on C-SPAN.
And in MA, U.S. District Judge Nathaniel Gorton - who was appointed by George H.W. Bush - refused to extend a restraining order against Mr. Trump's first executive order.
The clerk's office can not confirm if any judge or judges have recused themselves and said Thursday that the composition of the en banc panel will be revealed Monday.
The hearing will take place before 14 full-time judges of the appellate court. The exact list will be released Monday morning ahead of the hearing, set to begin at 2:30 pm (1830 GMT).
The 4th Circuit will decide the fate of a ruling from a Maryland district judge that struck down a section of the revised executive order barring visitors from Syria, Iran, Libya, Sudan, Yemen and Somalia.
The administration issued its first order on immigrant entry in late January. A panel of three federal judges will review the Hawaii judgment on appeal later this month at a court in Seattle, Washington.
Chuang's 43-page, March 16 ruling noted that the second executive order differs from the first, "in that the preference for religious minorities in the refugee process has been removed".
In a 43-page decision, Chuang detailed many of Trump's statements about Muslims from the campaign trail and concluded that despite the significant changes to who was exempted by the executive order the second time around, "the history of public statements continues to provide a convincing case that the objective of the Second Executive Order remains the realization of the long-envisioned Muslim ban".
The judge wrote that government officials defending the order "do not directly contest that this record of public statements reveals a religious motivation for the travel ban". But to the Trump administration, they are irrelevant, because all that counts is what the president said and did after he took the oath of office.
"In this highly unique case, the record provides strong indications that the national security objective is not the primary goal for the travel ban", he wrote.
- Written by Abdullahi
- Category: AMERICAS