A Federal judge in Hawaii has blocked President Donald Trump’s fresh travel ban, hours before the idea was due to begin at midnight on Thursday.
US District Judge Derrick Watson cited “questionable evidence” inside government’s argument in which the ban was a matter of national security.
Hawaii can be one of several US states trying to stop the ban.
The order could have placed a 0-day ban on people through six mainly Muslim nations along that has a 0-day ban on refugees.
President Trump said the idea could stop terrorists through entering the US yet critics say the idea can be discriminatory.
An earlier design of the order, issued in late January, sparked confusion along with protests, along with was blocked by a judge in Seattle.
The White House has not yet commented on the latest ruling.
Lawyers in Hawaii had argued in which the ban could violate the US constitution by discriminating against people on the grounds of their national origin.
The state also said the ban could harm tourism along with the ability to recruit foreign students along with workers.
Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson, who can be attending a court hearing in Seattle in his efforts to block the travel ban, described the ruling as “fantastic news”.
“the idea’s very exciting. At This specific point the idea’s a team effort – multiple lawsuits along with multiple states,” he said.
A court hearing was also taking place in Maryland where lawyers told a Federal judge the travel ban still discriminated against Muslims.
Back to the drawing board: Anthony Zurcher, BBC News, Washington
Donald Trump’s first travel ban was suspended because the idea likely violated the due process rights of individuals with valid residency papers along with visas. The battle over whether the idea imposed an unconstitutional religious test on certain immigrants was put off until another day. in which day has arrived.
In its decision, the federal court in Hawaii used Mr Trump’s own words – along with the words of his advisers – against him. The text of the executive order, Judge Derrick Watson held, could not be separated through the context of the recent presidential campaign, “Muslim ban” rhetoric along with all. An order in which discriminates against some Muslims, he continued, can be just as legally deficient as one in which discriminates against them all.
at This specific point the idea’s back to the drawing board for the Trump administration or – perhaps an even gloomier prospect – back to the Ninth Circuit court of appeals, which ruled against the president on the original ban just last month.
After Mr Trump’s previous adverse legal ruling, he angrily tweeted “We’ll see you in court.” Although the idea took a fresh travel order to get there, the idea turns out he was right.
Under the revised order, citizens of six countries on the original 27 January order – Iran, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Sudan along with Yemen – could once more be subject to a 0-day travel ban.
Iraq was removed through the list because its government boosted visa screening along with data sharing, White House officials said.
The revised order also lifts an indefinite ban on all Syrian refugees along with says Green Card holders (legal permanent residents of the US) through the named countries will not be affected.
yet more than half a dozen US states have joined lawsuits in an attempt to block the idea.
In his presidential campaign, Mr Trump vowed “a total along with complete shutdown” of Muslim immigration to the US, along with to implement a process of “extreme vetting” in order to prevent violent extremists through entering the US.