>
Article snippet: WASHINGTON — Three months after the federal appeals court in California blocked President Trump’s first travel ban, a three-judge panel of the same court heard arguments on Monday in a challenge to Mr. Trump’s revised ban, this one limiting travel from six predominantly Muslim countries. Mr. Trump views the appeals court — the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit — as a hostile forum, frequently criticizing it on Twitter. But the judges hearing Monday’s arguments asked probing questions of both sides and may not be ready to endorse the sweeping reasoning of a federal judge in Hawaii who blocked major parts of the revised order. The appeals court judges, all appointed by President Bill Clinton, barely tipped their hands, but they did say they recognized that the dispute before them was momentous. The argument was held in Seattle and broadcast live on C-Span. “This court is very well aware of the importance of this case,” Judge Ronald M. Gould said at the outset. In making the administration’s case, Jeffrey B. Wall, the acting United States solicitor general, urged the court to ignore campaign statements from Mr. Trump concerning his intention to issue a “Muslim ban” and focus instead on the terms of the revised executive order. “The order on its face doesn’t have anything to do with religion,” he said. Judge Michael Daly Hawkins asked whether Mr. Trump had ever disavowed his campaign statements. Mr. Wall responded that “over time the president clar... Link to the full article to read more