美國上訴法庭拒絕按川普的要求暫時擱置旅行禁令案
A U.S. federal appeals court has turned down the Trump administration's request to put its travel ban case on hold until the president issues a new executive order.
Three judges of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco gave no reason for their decision Monday.
The same court upheld a lower court decision suspending Trump's executive order temporarily banning travelers and refugees from seven Muslim-majority countries -- Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.
White House spokesman Sean Spicer was asked Monday why the administration is insisting on challenging the appeals court's ruling if President Trump plans to issue a new executive order on immigration. "While the new executive order attempts to address the court's concerns that they made, the goal is obviously to maintain the way that we did it the first time because we believe the law is very clear about giving the president the authority that he needs to protect the country," Spicer said.
The appeals court questioned the constitutionality of the travel ban. Some legal experts predict the case could wind up before the Supreme Court.
Trump's January 27 executive order created chaos in airports both in the U.S. and around the world. Immigration officers were confused as to who could be let in and who should be kept out even though many travelers had visas.
美國一個聯(lián)邦上訴法院拒絕了川普政府希望暫時擱置總統(tǒng)旅行禁令的案件，直到發(fā)布新的行政命令的要求。
舊金山第九巡回上訴法院的三名法官沒有為他們星期一的決定給出任何理由。
同一法院維持了一項下級法院暫停川普旅行限令的裁決，該行政令暫時禁止來自七個穆斯林占多數(shù)的國家的游客和難民。這七個國家是伊朗、伊拉克、利比亞、索馬里、蘇丹、敘利亞和也門。
白宮發(fā)言人斯派塞周一在被問到如果川普總統(tǒng)計劃發(fā)布新的移民行政命令，為什么還要堅持對上訴法院的裁決提出質(zhì)疑時回答說：“新的行政命令是要努力解決法院的擔(dān)心，但目標(biāo)顯然與我們第一次所做的相同，因為我們相信法律非常清楚地給予總統(tǒng)他所需要的權(quán)力來保護(hù)這個國家。”
上訴法院質(zhì)疑旅行禁令是否符合憲法。一些法律專家預(yù)測，此案可能最終要到聯(lián)邦最高法院來裁決。
川普總統(tǒng)1月27日的行政命令在美國和世界各地的機(jī)場造成混亂。入境官對于哪些人可以獲準(zhǔn)入境以及哪些人應(yīng)被拒絕入境感到困惑，雖然很多旅行者都持有赴美簽證。
A U.S. federal appeals court has turned down the Trump administration's request to put its travel ban case on hold until the president issues a new executive order.
Three judges of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco gave no reason for their decision Monday.
The same court upheld a lower court decision suspending Trump's executive order temporarily banning travelers and refugees from seven Muslim-majority countries -- Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.
White House spokesman Sean Spicer was asked Monday why the administration is insisting on challenging the appeals court's ruling if President Trump plans to issue a new executive order on immigration. "While the new executive order attempts to address the court's concerns that they made, the goal is obviously to maintain the way that we did it the first time because we believe the law is very clear about giving the president the authority that he needs to protect the country," Spicer said.
The appeals court questioned the constitutionality of the travel ban. Some legal experts predict the case could wind up before the Supreme Court.
Trump's January 27 executive order created chaos in airports both in the U.S. and around the world. Immigration officers were confused as to who could be let in and who should be kept out even though many travelers had visas.
美國一個聯(lián)邦上訴法院拒絕了川普政府希望暫時擱置總統(tǒng)旅行禁令的案件，直到發(fā)布新的行政命令的要求。
舊金山第九巡回上訴法院的三名法官沒有為他們星期一的決定給出任何理由。
同一法院維持了一項下級法院暫停川普旅行限令的裁決，該行政令暫時禁止來自七個穆斯林占多數(shù)的國家的游客和難民。這七個國家是伊朗、伊拉克、利比亞、索馬里、蘇丹、敘利亞和也門。
白宮發(fā)言人斯派塞周一在被問到如果川普總統(tǒng)計劃發(fā)布新的移民行政命令，為什么還要堅持對上訴法院的裁決提出質(zhì)疑時回答說：“新的行政命令是要努力解決法院的擔(dān)心，但目標(biāo)顯然與我們第一次所做的相同，因為我們相信法律非常清楚地給予總統(tǒng)他所需要的權(quán)力來保護(hù)這個國家。”
上訴法院質(zhì)疑旅行禁令是否符合憲法。一些法律專家預(yù)測，此案可能最終要到聯(lián)邦最高法院來裁決。
川普總統(tǒng)1月27日的行政命令在美國和世界各地的機(jī)場造成混亂。入境官對于哪些人可以獲準(zhǔn)入境以及哪些人應(yīng)被拒絕入境感到困惑，雖然很多旅行者都持有赴美簽證。
