WASHINGTON (AP) – The Justice Department is asking a federal appeals court to set aside a judge’s order that temporarily blocked the Trump administration’s travel ban.

The federal government’s request for an emergency stay was filed Saturday night with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The filing asks the court to lift an order from a day earlier from a judge in Washington state.

The ruling from U.S. District Judge James Robart temporarily halted a Trump administration executive order that suspended America’s refugee program and halted immigration to the U.S. from seven Muslim-majority countries.

The administration on Saturday moved to suspend enforcement of the travel ban as the Justice Department readied its legal challenge.

President Donald Trump has lashed out at Robart on Twitter, calling him a “so-called judge.”

Never miss another Facebook post from WISH-TV </s> A federal appeals court early Sunday morning denied the US government’s emergency request to resume President Donald Trump’s travel ban.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has asked for both sides to file legal briefs before the court makes its final decision after a federal judge halted the program on Friday.

What this means is that the ruling by US District Court Judge James Robart, who suspended the ban, will remain in place — for now.

The US Justice Department filed an appeal just after midnight Sunday, asking to pause Robart’s sweeping decision that temporarily halted enforcement of several key provisions of Trump’s executive order.

The order bars citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries — Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen — from entering the US for 90 days, all refugees for 120 days and indefinitely halts refugees from Syria.

The Justice Department’s strongly worded court filing lodged a multi-pronged attack on Robart’s decision, emphasizing that halting enforcement of the travel ban “harms the public” and “second-guesses the President’s national security judgment” in the immigration context.

“(Robart’s ruling) contravenes the considered judgment of Congress that the President should have the unreviewable authority to suspend the admission of any class of aliens,” the Justice Department wrote in its filing.

“Courts are particularly ill-equipped to second-guess the President’s prospective judgment about future risks. Unlike the President, courts do not have access to classified information about the threat posed by terrorist organizations operating in particular nations, the efforts of those organizations to infiltrate the United States, or gaps in the vetting process,” the filing said.

Justice Department lawyers further argued that the parties who filed the lawsuit — the attorneys general of Washington state and Minnesota — lack the ability to sue in federal court because their alleged harms are too “speculative.”

Since the federal appeals court rejected a request to immediately reinstate the travel ban, lawyers for Washington state and Minnesota have until 2:59 a.m. Monday to file legal papers, and the Justice Department lawyers have until 6 p.m. Monday evening to reply. Then a three-judge panel will decide whether to schedule a hearing or issue a ruling.

Robart, a Bush appointee sitting in the Western District of Washington, ruled Friday that the states that filed the lawsuit “have met their burden of demonstrating that they face immediate and irreparable injury as a result of the signing and implementation of the executive order.”

Robart explained that Trump’s executive order adversely affects “residents in areas of employment, education, business, family relations, and freedom to travel.”

When Trump was asked at a gala in Florida on Saturday whether he was confident his administration would prevail in the appeal, he replied, “We’ll win. For the safety of the country, we’ll win.”

On Saturday, the Department of Homeland Security announced it had suspended “any and all” actions to implement the immigration order and would resume standard inspections of travelers, as it did prior to the signing of the travel ban.

After the Ninth Circuit’s decision on Sunday, a US Embassy official in Baghdad said that holders of valid US visas, including Iraqi Special Immigrant Visas, would be allowed to travel to the United States.

“The US Government has determined that it is in the national interest to allow Iraqi Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) holders to continue to travel to the United States,” the embassy official said, adding that the embassy had been in contact with the SIV applicants. </s> U.S. Justice Department will not file immediate stay against Seattle immigration ruling

TORONTO, Feb 3 (Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Justice will not be filing an emergency stay on Friday night to overturn a Seattle's judge ruling that blocked a U.S. executive order temporarily barring refugees and nationals from seven countries from entering the United States, a spokesman said.

The White House had earlier said the emergency motion would be filed "at the earliest possible time." (Reporting by Julia Edwards Ainsley; Editing by Nick Macfie) </s> The Department of Justice has filed an appeal against a federal judge in Washington state’s ruling that temporarily halted President Donald Trump’s executive order on immigration.

The ruling, handed down Friday by Judge James Robart, came as a result of a lawsuit brought by the states of Washington and Minnesota to halt the order, which temporarily barred travelers and refugees from seven Muslim countries from entering the U.S.

According to the Associated Press, the request for an emergency stay, which would reinstate the order, was filed Saturday night in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. This move was largely expected after White House press secretary Sean Spicer issued a statement Friday night calling the ruling an “outrageous order” and saying the administration would file an appeal “at the earliest possible time.”

Trump also blasted the decision on Twitter Saturday morning, saying it spelled “big trouble” and challenging the authority of “this so-called judge.”

Trump also referenced a ruling by a Boston judge earlier Friday that would have allowed an injunction against the ban to expire Sunday, allowing authorities to reinstitute the travel restrictions. Robart’s decision overrode this ruling and was granted on a nationwide basis, per ABC News.

“Why aren't the lawyers looking at and using the Federal Court decision in Boston, which is at conflict with ridiculous lift ban decision?” Trump wrote on Twitter.

However, the appeal is also likely to create confusion as the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department began giving airlines clearance to accept U.S. visa-holders from the affected countries onto flights on Saturday morning. According to the Associated Press, this has led to a crush of people attempting to enter the country while the order is no longer in effect.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is headquartered in San Francisco, but also has facilities in Seattle.

This is a developing story and will be updated with more details. </s> The Department of Justice has filed an appeal against a federal judge in Washington state’s ruling that temporarily halted President Donald Trump’s executive order on immigration.

The ruling, handed down Friday, came as a result of a lawsuit by the states of Washington and Minnesota to halt the order, which temporarily barred travelers and refugees from seven Muslim countries from entering the U.S.

According to the Associated Press, the request for an emergency stay, which would reinstate the order, was filed Saturday night in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. This move was largely expected after White House press secretary Sean Spicer issued a statement Friday night calling the ruling an “outrageous order” and saying the administration would file an appeal “at the earliest possible time.”

This is a developing story and will be updated with more details. </s> WASHINGTON, DC – The Justice Department on Saturday moved to appeal a decision that temporarily halted enforcement of President Donald Trump’s travel ban.

The appeal concerns a late Friday decision by a US district court that halted the enforcement of Trump’s executive order. Trump’s policy banned travel to the US from seven Muslim-majority countries for 90 days, suspended all refugee entry to the US for 120 days and indefinitely suspended entry for Syrian refugees.

A notice of appeal was sent Saturday night to the US district court, where Judge James Robart, a George W. Bush appointee, presides in Seattle.

The Justice Department is expected to file its brief laying out its legal argument later Saturday night to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which will hear the appeal.

Hours after Robart’s ruling, the Department of Homeland Security announced it had suspended all actions to implement the immigration order and would resume standard inspections of travelers as it did prior to the signing of the travel ban. But it urged the Justice Department to challenge the ruling “at the earliest possible time.”

The three judges who will likely hear the appeal — assuming no one has to step aside over any conflicts — are: Judge William Canby, who was appointed by President Jimmy Carter; Richard Clifton, who was appointed by Bush; and Michelle Friedland, a President Barack Obama appointee.

Robart, ruling in a lawsuit brought by the attorneys general of Washington state and Minnesota who sought to stop the order, said the states “have met their burden of demonstrating that they face immediate and irreparable injury as a result of the signing and implementation of the executive order. ”

He said the order adversely affects residents in areas of education, employment, education and freedom to travel. </s> The US Justice Department on Saturday appealed a temporary block of Donald Trump’s travel ban on citizens from seven mainly Muslim countries, after the president unleashed a fiery tirade and those with valid visas started arriving on American soil.

It was just the latest in a series of dramatic twists since the Republican billionaire leader issued his immigration order a week ago.

On Friday, a federal judge in Washington state put a temporary stay on the measures pending a wider legal review, prompting government agencies and global airlines to cease enforcing the ban.

Thousands of people from London and Paris to New York and Washington staged fresh protests against Trump, who took office on January 20 — little more than two weeks ago.

The Manhattan property mogul-turned-president, who was spending the weekend at his Mar-a-Lago vacation retreat in Florida, unloaded a barrage of angry tweets throughout the day.

He specifically targeted US District Judge James Robart — an appointee of Republican president George W. Bush — in an extremely rare attack on a federal judge from a sitting president.

“The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!” Trump tweeted early in the day.

In the evening, he posted: “The judge opens up our country to potential terrorists and others that do not have our best interests at heart. Bad people are very happy!”

Late Saturday, the Justice Department filed its motion to appeal, though the legal brief detailing its arguments has yet to come.

“We’ll win. For the safety of the country, we’ll win,” Trump told reporters.

The case will now move to a federal appeals court.

Nevertheless, government authorities began complying with the lower court judge’s ruling, reopening the borders to those with proper travel documents.

The State Department told visa holders from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen that they are again allowed to travel as long as the documents had not been “physically cancelled.”

The department earlier said up to 60,000 people had their visas revoked as a result of Trump’s order, although a Justice Department attorney put the number at closer to 100,000.

The Department of Homeland Security — which runs border agencies — also said it would cease implementing the order.

The restrictions on all refugees and travelers from the seven countries went into effect a week ago, wreaking havoc at airports across America and leaving travelers trying to reach the United States in limbo.

The political backlash for Trump has been equally severe, with the order fueling numerous mass protests and White House infighting.

In Washington, hundreds of demonstrators marched from the White House to Capitol Hill, chanting “Donald, Donald, can’t you see — we don’t want you in DC!”

About 3,000 people rallied in New York, while an estimated 10,000 people turned out in London, and smaller gatherings took place in Paris, Berlin, Stockholm and Barcelona.

Trump was forced to defend a botched rollout of the plan — which called his government’s competence into question — and fired the acting attorney general for refusing to defend the order in court.

His approval rating has sunk to the lowest level on record for any new president.

His latest rhetorical outburst is only likely to stoke the controversy.

Presidents from Thomas Jefferson to Barack Obama have criticized court rulings, but have rarely, if ever, criticized individual judges.

“I can’t think of anything like it in the past century and a half at least,” constitutional scholar and Harvard Law professor Laurence Tribe told AFP.

“It’s not exactly contempt of court, but it certainly is contemptuous,” said Tribe, who taught two sitting Supreme Court justices as well as Obama — whom he later advised.

“It conveys a lack of respect for the independent judiciary that bodes ill for the country’s future as long as Trump occupies the presidency,” Tribe said.

Democrats in Congress were swift in their condemnation of Trump’s remarks, while Republicans notably did not rush to his defense.

“This ‘so-called’ judge was nominated by a ‘so-called’ President & was confirmed by the ‘so-called’ Senate. Read the ‘so-called’ Constitution,” tweeted California Democratic lawmaker Adam Schiff.

The White House has argued that the travel bans are needed in order to prevent terror attacks on the United States.

Experts from the fields of intelligence, counterterrorism and diplomacy say the ban is at best ineffective and at worst fuels hatred of the United States in the Middle East.

But cracking down on Islamist terror has become an organizing principle for Trump supporters and the White House has consistently sought to underscore the risks posed to Americans.

“When a country is no longer able to say who can, and who cannot, come in & out, especially for reasons of safety &.security – big trouble!” Trump tweeted Saturday. </s> TORONTO (Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Justice will not be filing an emergency stay on Friday night to overturn a Seattle’s judge ruling that blocked a U.S. executive order temporarily barring refugees and nationals from seven countries from entering the United States, a spokesman said.

The White House had earlier said the emergency motion would be filed “at the earliest possible time.” </s> TORONTO (Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Justice will not be filing an emergency stay on Friday night to overturn a Seattle's judge ruling that blocked a U.S. executive order temporarily barring refugees and nationals from seven countries from entering the United States, a spokesman said.

The White House had earlier said the emergency motion would be filed "at the earliest possible time."
Late Saturday, the Justice Department files a request to "immediately stay" Friday's court ruling.