Debating the travel ban? Terms to understand what's what
[...] critics, who won an early skirmish in the legal battles over it, describe the order as unconstitutional and discriminatory against Muslims and say that it has caused hardships for families, businesses and universities.
The 3,100-word order would temporarily ban visitors from seven mainly Muslim countries with terror ties, halt the entire U.S. refugee program for four months and ban Syrians from the U.S. indefinitely.
[...] his press secretary says that's not a fair characterization since plenty of people continued to flow into the United States when the order was in effect.
Trump's order is on hold for now because a federal judge in Seattle last week issued a temporary restraining order "to preserve the status quo" until the courts have a chance to explore legal arguments on the constitutionality of the order.
Trump's legal team has asked the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to issue an "emergency stay" that would allow the president's order to go back into effect while the courts consider the merits of the case.
Trump's lawyer told the judges that rather than issuing an up-or-down ruling, the court could strike a middle ground and exempt from the ban people who have previously been admitted to the U.S., and keep it in place for people who have never visited.
After the three-judge panel rules, the losing side can request a re-hearing by a larger group of judges on the 9th Circuit.