Federal appeals magistrates cited comments Trump made on the campaign trail in which he promised a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the U
Testy exchanges between magistrates and lawyers over Donald Trumps travel ban on Monday was pointed out that the legality of the presidents executive order could be determined by his prior comments about Muslims.
The pointed questioning arrived during an appeals court hearing about an executive order Trump issued in March that attempted to halt brand-new visas from six-Muslim majority countries and suspend refugee resettlement in the US. The first order in January was chaotically implemented and locked by federal courts. The revised order was also blocked by courts in Maryland and Hawaii after magistrates saw soils for constitutional violations.
The Trump administration then plea these rulings and on Monday faced the coming stage in its legal duel during a hearing in front of 13 magistrates at the fourth circuit of appeals in Virginia.
Almost immediately magistrates questioned acting US solicitor general Jeffrey Wall about past statements made by Trump on the campaign trail during the presidential election in which he promised a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the US.
The comments made by Trump and other statements about the order that were later made by those working in his government were cited by magistrates in Maryland and Hawaii as evidence of the orders animus towards Muslims when the order was blocked in March.
This is not a Muslim ban. Its text doesnt have to anything to do with religion, Wall argued on Monday as a number of magistrates peppered him with questions.
Read more: http :// www.theguardian.com/ us