this is ultimate going to go to the security of the united states regardless. blake burman has more. the ninth circuit court will consider two factors. first, do the states, washington state and minnesota, have standing in this case at all. secondly, was the temporarily restraining order properly imposed. washington state and minnesota and their briefings say if the president s executive order would go forward, it would unleash chaos. government lawyers say the states don t have standing at all. here in the white house, they remain very confident. the president has authority to do this. it was done so in an interagency process that ensured that all of the people were consulted. we went through that with flying colors. i have zero concern that at the end of the day we ll be fine. here s the timing going
if the 9th circuit court does not rule in favor of the department of justice allowing it to put the ban back in place, all of this goes back to the court in washington and go through the court and maybe we ll finally have a decision. how long that s going to take, we don t know yet. sara sflooid sidener, cnn, san francisco. thanks to sara for that. earlier we spoke about all of these critical legal challenges with constitutional expert alander, vitz from harvard law school. take a listen. there are 29 judges on the 9th circuit. three get selected to hear a case. so we re playing judicial roulette. the court has some of the most liberal and conservative judges. it depends who s drawn in the wheel. argument the government will make will be that these states don t have standing to object to the president s executive order. that the president s executive order is constitutional. and the president has authorized the to make the kinds you have judgment he made and it s
make is that these states don t have standing to object to the president s executive order, that the president s executive order is constitutional and the president is authorized to make the kinds of judgment he made and it s impossible to predict what the outcome will be. my own judgment is that part of the president s executive order is constitutional. part of it is unconstitutional. what s required is a calibrated nuance the approach to it. so far, none of the courts have given it that kind of approach. the court in washington said the statute, or the regulation is unconstitutional. and we re not clear what the end result is going to be. no one can predict its outcome. and now donald trump has attacked the judge who made this decision, he took to twitter, and the president wrote the judge opens up our country to terrorists. what did you make of this sort of attack from the commander in chief of the judicial system? well, first of all, anybody s
meanwhile, the administration has come back and said, look, these states don t have standing, and the president here has broad authority. that s what s in front of the ninth circuit now. that s where we are. all right. paige, to you now. you ve read the 30-page intent to appeal by the department of justice. they specifically say that these two states don t have enough evidence to show that this travel ban is detrimental to their citizens. right. what evidence could they then present to challenge that? you know, boris, i think that s the most difficult part of the state s arguments. before the court ever gets to the constitutional arguments and the real meaty issues in the case, they have to first decide that these states have standing to file the suit, that they have a right to challenge this executive order in court. now, like texas did back when that state challenged president obama s immigration executive order, they ve tried to rely on how it affects their economic interest
the attorney general of washington said he would like to see the case go all the way to the supreme court if need be. let s talk about all of this legally where we go from here. our supreme court reporter is here with us and georgetown university law professor and a constitutional law scholar jonathan turley is with us. a arianne how do you the they re making constitutional and statutory arguments, they say it discriminates on the basis of the national origin. the government says they don t have, these states don t have standing and the executive has broad authority. in this area. so cases are ping-ponging across the country. right now one district court has issued this temporary restraining order blocking it nationwide. the doj has asked for a stay of that. and with the ninth circuit. depending on how the ninth