The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday ruled against the third version of President Trump’s travel ban, which restricts travel to the U.S. from eight countries that pose a significant terrorist risk, including six with majority Muslim populations.
The 9-4 ruling from the federal appeals court based in Richmond, Va., was put on hold, however, while the U.S. Supreme Court considers another travel ban case.
The high court announced last month it would hear another case out of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals challenging the travel ban, and has allowed the ban to take effect. The justices will likely hear oral arguments in April.
“Examining official statements from President Trump and other executive branch officials, along with the proclamation itself, we conclude that the proclamation is unconstitutionally tainted with animus toward Islam,” 4th circuit Chief Judge Roger Gregory wrote in his opinion.
The Richmond-based federal appeals court heard oral arguments in the travel ban case in December. Its ruling Thursday upheld a preliminary injunction issued by a lower court.
“Plaintiffs here do not just plausibly allege with particularity that the Proclamation’s purpose is driven by anti-Muslim bias, they offer undisputed evidence of such bias: the words of the President,” Gregory wrote.
The chief judge noted the president’s “disparaging comments and tweets regarding Muslims,” as well as Trump’s repeated proposals to “ban Muslims from entering the United States.”
The ruling Thursday marks the second time a federal appeals court has ruled against Trump’s third travel ban, which the Trump administration rolled out in September.
The administration has also faced a string of defeats in the lower courts, where two federal judges — one in Hawaii and another in Maryland — blocked the travel ban from taking effect.
Trump’s third travel ban enforces travel restrictions to foreigners coming to the U.S. from Chad, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Yemen, North Korea, and Venezuela.
The president’s two prior travel bans were also blocked by the lower courts.
