By Sarah Jaffe and Matt ZapotoskyJanuary 25, 2019 12:12:05After the court ruled Monday to block the administration’s travel order, a number of prominent members of the liberal media took to social media to weigh in.
One of the most influential outlets in the liberal blogosphere, Talking Points Memo, ran a headline reading, “Supreme Court Just Declares Travel Ban Imperfect.”
Another headline on the blog said, “What’s the Deal With This Travel Ban?.”
The tweets were in response to a ruling from a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit in Washington, D.C., that found the travel ban was unconstitutional.
The decision was an upset for Trump, who said he would stay the ruling in his Supreme Court review of the ban and to take legal action against the court.
“I don’t see any other way,” Trump said in a statement.
“I have a great team of lawyers and am going to fight hard for what I believe in.”
The decision by the court also came after the Trump administration filed a motion asking the appeals court to hear a request to temporarily block the travel order from taking effect.
Trump has repeatedly vowed to continue his court fight, and he vowed to have the appeals courts “revoke” the travel ruling, if necessary.
The court did not issue a ruling on the merits of the appeal.
But Justice Neil Gorsuch, who is on the court’s conservative wing, said he will consider whether the appeals judges’ ruling is correct.
He said in the court filing that the ruling is based on the wrong reading of the constitutional text and said the government is entitled to go forward with its own judicial review of whether the executive order is constitutional.
“In my view, the majority decision does not resolve this challenge, and we will consider that issue in the appropriate forum,” Gorsuch wrote in the brief.
He also warned that the court could “consider whether to strike down the travel restriction or its effects in its entirety” if it believes the order is unconstitutional.
Gorsuch also said he intends to hear an appeal from an Oregon resident, who has been detained by Customs and Border Protection at Dulles Airport since March 10.
In a separate case filed Monday, the Supreme Judicial Court is hearing a challenge to the travel and refugee vetting system that Trump has ordered for 90 days.
The case is one of two challenges Trump’s administration filed against a separate travel ban he signed in March.
Both cases were dismissed in April.
In the court filings, the administration argued the court should take a broader view of the president’s authority under the Constitution than a narrow reading of a clause in the First Amendment that bars the government from interfering with the freedom of speech or the right to assemble.
“The Court should take seriously the importance of the Constitution’s protections of free speech and the freedom to assemble in the context of the federal government’s determination that the Executive Order’s ‘imperfections’ outweigh its constitutional purpose,” the White House said in an affidavit.
“The Court’s decision today should be a reminder to the Executive Branch that even in the face of ‘impetus,’ its statutory power is not unlimited and its discretion cannot be abridged.”
The administration argued that the constitutional limits on the president do not apply to his power to make the executive branch act.
“This Court has long held that a president may exercise the powers conferred by the Constitution and the separation of powers without first exercising them through the legislative branch,” the government wrote.
“As a matter of fact, a president’s power to exercise his powers may be limited by the limitations imposed by the separation between the legislative and executive branches.”