Chris Kleponis/DPA/PA Images. All rights reserved.The Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals has declined to reinstate president Trump’s executive order which temporarily bans people from seven Muslim-majority countries. The unanimous decision to uphold the suspension of his executive order is the most significant legal setback to Trump’s attempt to resume the ban.

The court wrote: “We hold that the Government has not shown a likelihood of success on the merits of its appeal, nor has it shown that failure to enter a stay would cause irreparable injury, and we therefore deny its emergency motion for a stay."

Trump tweeted his response, capitalised, promising to challenge the refusal:

SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!

If Trump continues to pursue the appeal, the case could end up before the US Supreme Court.

For more on the travel ban, we highly recommend reading Matthew Altman’s unravelling of its legal and moral dimensions – the benefits of the ban are utterly nonexistent, he argues, but the economic, political and humanitarian costs are very real:

"The president’s travel ban is probably illegal, but it is clearly immoral. It disregards the suffering of non-US citizens while giving absolute priority to a false sense of security for Americans. It increases rather than decreases security concerns for US citizens, and hinders the American economy. By discriminating against Muslims, it contradicts the US’s longstanding and constitutionally guaranteed commitment to religious pluralism. It reneges on promises made to people who have submitted themselves to the country’s thorough and successful immigration processes, and it fails to honor international agreements.

Massive protests in the US are demonstrating to Trump and the rest of the world that the American people, by and large, do not see refugees and immigrant visa-holders as a security threat, and that they reject the anti-Muslim sentiment codified in the order. Organisations such as the ACLU should continue to challenge the travel ban in court. Early rulings by federal judges have been encouraging. And American lawmakers should use the power they have to oppose Trump on this issue – for example, by voting against Trump’s nominee for Attorney General unless he explicitly rejects the ban and vows, like Yates, not to defend it in court. Executive orders are not divine pronouncements. We must resist them if they are immoral and illegal."

→ It’s worth reading in full here.