The second federal appeals court to consider President Trump’s travel ban against selected mostly Muslim nations reached the same result as the first — that the ban cannot take effect — but for reasons that struck at the heart of Trump’s national-security argument and could lessen his chances of prevailing in the U.S. Supreme Court.
In a 3-0 ruling Monday, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco said the president had offered no evidence that temporarily barring immigrants and visitors from the targeted nations, as well as all would-be refugees, would protect the United States from terrorism.
Stanford Law Professor Michael McConnell had a different view.
“The most shocking thing about the panel opinion is that it presumes the authority of courts to second-guess the president on a foreign affairs issue vested in him alone,” said McConnell, director of Stanford’s Constitutional Law Center. He predicted a Supreme Court reversal.Read More