President Donald Trump said on Friday that he is considering issuing a new executive order that will ban people from certain Muslim-majority countries from traveling to the U.S. after a three-judge panel from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco upheld a ruling by a federal judge in Seattle placing a temporary restraining order on a travel ban issued earlier on January 27.
The order by the federal judge in Seattle was issued in response to a challenge filed by the state of Washington.
According to NBC News, White House lawyers are working to rewrite the executive order so that it can pass legal muster.
Trump announced that he was considering a “brand new order” during a talk with media reporters aboard Air Force One on Friday, while flying to his estate in Florida for the weekend with the Japanese premier, according to the BBC.
Trump also revealed that the new travel ban could be issued as early as Monday or Tuesday.
When reporters asked Trump what changes would be made in the new order he said, “very little.”
“The unfortunate part is that it takes time statutorily… we’ll win that battle,” Trump added, according to NBC News. “But we also have a lot of other options, including just filing a brand new order on Monday.”
The original order issued on January 27 had barred people traveling from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen from entering the U.S. for 90 days. It also barred all refugees for 120 days, with the exception of refugees from Syria who were barred indefinitely.
The so-called “Muslim ban” came under severe criticism and sparked a wave of protests across the country. Several of the country’s allies in the West also criticized the ban.
The implementation of the order caused chaos at major airports after officials detained and refused to allow green card holders from the affected countries from entering the country.
Although Trump did not give any details about the new ban, a congressional aide with knowledge of the matter told the Huffington Post that Trump could rewrite the previous ban to remove concerns that were expressed in court, such as stating explicitly that green card holders and permanents residents are excluded from the ban.
Another official said the rewriting would likely involve officials of the National Security Council, the Department of Homeland Security, the Justice Department and a White House aide, Stephen Miller, who had helped to draft the first order.
But officials said that even if Trump issues a new order the administration could still refer the appeals court ruling to the Supreme Court.
Meanwhile, on Friday, a judge on the 9th Circuit requested the court’s 25 judges to vote for an en banc review, that is, a review of the decision to uphold the restraining order on the travel ban by an 11-panel judge instead of the three-panel judge that heard the first appeal.
Reince Priebus, the White house Chief of Staff, confirmed yesterday that the administration could still exercise the option of challenging the unfavorable court rulings in the Supreme Court.
“Every single court option is on the table, including an appeal of the Ninth Circuit decision on the temporary restraining order to the Supreme Court,” he said.
He also confirmed that the administration was considering a new executive order to replace the previous one.
“We’re pursuing executive orders right now that we expect to be enacted soon that will further protect Americans from terrorism,” he added
But experts have said that a new travel ban order could also be challenged in court and a new restraining order issued.
Alexander Reinert, a legal expert at Yeshiva University’s Cardozo School of Law in New York, told the Huffington Post that those who filed the previous complaint could ask the same court to allow them to amend their complaints so that a new restraining order can be issued.
Trump had taken to Twitter to express outrage after the restraining order by the federal judge in Seattle. He also took to Twitter on Thursday to voice displeasure after the appeals court upheld the restraining order by the lower court.
[Featured Image by Pablo Martinez Monsivaiz/AP Images]