The San Francisco ruling was the second one by an appeals court refusing to allow the executive order to take effect. "As the government says, there is no doubt that this executive order 'has been the subject of passionate political debate.' But whatever one's views, 'the precedent set by this case for the judiciary's proper role in reviewing the president's national security and immigration authority will transcend this debate, this order, and this constitutional moment'".
While the dispute over the travel ban and other controversies have simmered during Trump's first few months in office, his choice of the 49-year-old Gorsuch for the Supreme Court won widespread praise in the legal community as well as unanimous Republican support in the Senate.
The president's revised order seeks to ban travel from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for at least 90 days, and temporarily halt all refugee applications for 120 days. Because he issued the ban back in March, those 90 days are up this week.
"We need to be smart, vigilant and tough".
Legendary journalist Lyle Denniston is Constitution Daily's Supreme Court correspondent. "The President was clear in his landmark speech in Saudi Arabia: this is not about religion; it is about national security".More news: Kepler telescope catalogues hundreds of new alien worlds, some potentially habitable
More news: Militants offer 'gun salute' at LeT commander's funeral in Kashmir
More news: Iraqi troops launch battle for last IS stronghold in Mosul
A federal judge first blocked Trump's initial travel ban in early February.
Immigration activists, including members of the DC Justice for Muslims Coalition, rally against the Trump administration's new ban against travelers from six Muslim-majority nations, outside of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection headquarters in Washington, U.S., March 7, 2017. "It can not go unchecked when, as here, the President wields it through an executive edict that stands to cause irreparable harm to individuals across this nation".
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed the Trump administration more time to file papers responding to an appeals court ruling that upheld a block on a proposed travel ban on people entering the United States from six Muslim-majority countries.
"Today's ruling once again demonstrates the near-unanimity of judges in ruling against any type of 'Muslim ban, '" said CAIR National Litigation Director Lena Masri.
The high court also is being asked to uphold the constitutionality of the Trump travel policy, which lower courts have blocked saying it shows anti-Muslim prejudice.