“The government has pointed to no evidence that any alien from any of the countries named in the order has perpetrated a terrorist attack in the United States,” the ruling read.
The decision came six days after U.S. District Court Judge James Robart, in Seattle, froze the travel ban nationwide after challenges from Washington state and Minnesota. Robart said that both states had standing to challenge Trump’s order and were likely to succeed.
"The state has met its burden in demonstrating immediate and irreparable injury," Robart said in his ruling.The U.S. Department of Justice filed a notice of appeal on Saturday.
In a hearing Tuesday, judges on the appeals court challenged the administration's claim that the ban was motivated by terrorism fears, but also questioned an attorney's argument that it unconstitutionally targeted Muslims.
Trump slammed critics of the immigration order and the courts Wednesday while meeting with police chiefs from across the country.
“I don’t ever want to call a court biased, so I won’t call it biased, and we haven’t had a decision yet, but courts seem to be so political,” Trump said. “It would be so great for our justice system if they would be able to read a statement and do what’s right. And that has to do with the security of our country, which is so important.”
The executive order, signed by Trump on Jan. 27, temporarily barred citizens of Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen from traveling to the United States and suspended the U.S. refugee program. It sparked protests nationwide and led to widespread confusion at airports, but the White House has argued that the order is necessary to ensure the safety of the United States.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Experts weigh in on the decision: