The Court Case Against the ‘Travel Ban’ Executive Order21st Century Wire says The legal battle is waging on over President Trump s Executive Order Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the US when on Saturday the Department of Justice requested a lift of the stay placed on enforcement of the Executive Order. The federal appeal court denied the DoJ s request, noting the the plaintiffs should first be given an opportunity to respond. Contrary to what many media outlets are saying, this was not a case of the courts saying that the order is  unconstitutional  as the ACLU and a number of Attorney Generals are claiming, but is standard practice in appeals cases.The Duran provides some further legal analysis on this developing case below  Alexander Mercouris The DuranThe legal moves and counter-moves in the court case concerning Donald Trump s  travel ban  Executive Order may appear complicated, but in reality they follow standard practice.  Since there are some misunderstandings in reporting them I will provide a brief explanation.The federal judge in Seattle on Friday did not rule that the Executive Order is unconstitutional or illegal.  Rather he ordered a temporary two week stay on the enforcement of the Executive Order until this question of its legality is decided in further argument before him in two weeks time.In doing so the judge acted fully within his powers, though as I understand it he took a different view from a different federal judge in Massachusetts who apparently refused to grant a similar stay when he was asked to do so at roughly the same time that the judge in Seattle was making his decision.The Department of Justice is appealing the stay.  It is doing so on the grounds that the Executive Order is fully legal and constitutional and needs to be brought back into force immediately in order to protect the US from potential terrorists, who might take advantage of the stay to enter the US during the two week period when it is in effect.On Saturday the Department of Justice asked the federal appeal court in San Francisco (which will hear the appeal) to lift the stay.  The federal appeal court however refused to do so, saying that the plaintiffs who applied for the stay should be given an opportunity to respond.  It gave the plaintiffs until Sunday (ie. today) to file their objections to the Department of Justice s application to lift the stay, with the Department of Justice instructed to file its counter-objections on Monday (ie. tomorrow).Contrary to some media claims, this is completely standard practice during appeals.  It would be very unusual for an appeal court to set aside a judge s order   even a temporary order   without a full hearing, and the Department of Justice will undoubtedly have known this when it applied to the appeal court to have the stay lifted on Saturday.The reason the Department of Justice made the application on Saturday is because it wants to emphasise to the appeal court the urgency of the situation.  This is important, not just because of the danger of terrorists entering the US during the period of the stay, but because unless the appeal court is convinced of the urgency of the situation it will simply say that the Department of Justice should wait until the hearing ordered by the federal judge in Seattle in two weeks time.In other words by insisting that the stay be lifted immediately the Department of Justice is providing reasons to the appeal court to take the case out of the federal judge s hands, so that it can decide the case itself.  That was the true purpose of the application on Saturday, and it succeeded.I expect the appeal court in San Francisco to decide the appeal this week, possibly as soon as Tuesday or Wednesday.As I am not an expert in US constitutional law I do not know what the outcome of the appeal will be.  I should say that it would be completely wrong to try to guess the outcome from the decision the appeal court took on Saturday.The appeal will be purely on the question of the rightness or otherwise of the stay.  If the appeal decision goes against the President it will be for the Department of Justice to put his case to the federal judge at the full hearing in two weeks time.  If that decision also goes against the President, he can appeal again to the federal appeal court in San Francisco, and beyond that to the Supreme Court.By contrast if the Department of Justice wins the appeal this week then I would expect the plaintiffs to drop the case in Seattle and try to go directly to the Supreme Court.  Since the appeal court would have effectively affirmed the legality of the Executive Order, there would be little point in the plaintiffs continuing to contest the Executive Order before the federal judge in Seattle Continue this report at The DuranREAD MORE TRUMP NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Trump FilesSUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @21WIRE.TVMiddle-east
the court case against travel ban executive century wire says the legal battle waging president trump executive order protecting nation from foreign terrorist entry into us saturday department justice requested lift stay placed enforcement executive order the federal appeal court denied doj request noting plaintiffs first given opportunity respond contrary many media outlets saying case courts saying order unconstitutional actu number attorney generals claiming standard practice appeals quran provides legal analysis developing case alexander mercouris the durante legal moves court case concerning donald trump travel ban executive order may appear complicated reality follow standard practice since misunderstandings reporting i provide brief federal judge seattle friday rule executive order unconstitutional illegal rather ordered temporary two week stay enforcement executive order question legality decided argument two weeks judge acted fully within powers though i understand took different view different federal judge massachusetts apparently refused grant similar stay asked roughly time judge seattle making department justice appealing stay it grounds executive order fully legal constitutional needs brought back force immediately order protect us potential terrorists might take advantage stay enter us two week period saturday department justice asked federal appeal court san francisco hear appeal lift stay the federal appeal court however refused saying plaintiffs applied stay given opportunity respond it gave plaintiffs sunday ie today file objections department justice application lift stay department justice instructed file monday ie tomorrow media claims completely standard practice appeals it would unusual appeal court set aside judge order even temporary order without full hearing department justice undoubtedly known applied appeal court stay lifted reason department justice made application saturday wants emphasise appeal court urgency situation this important danger terrorists entering us period stay unless appeal court convinced urgency situation simply say department justice wait hearing ordered federal judge seattle two weeks words insisting stay lifted immediately department justice providing reasons appeal court take case federal judge hands decide case that true purpose application saturday expect appeal court san francisco decide appeal week possibly soon tuesday i expert us constitutional law i know outcome appeal i say would completely wrong try guess outcome decision appeal court took appeal purely question brightness otherwise stay if appeal decision goes president department justice put case federal judge full hearing two weeks time if decision also goes president appeal federal appeal court san francisco beyond supreme contrast department justice wins appeal week i would expect plaintiffs drop case seattle try go directly supreme court since appeal court would effectively affirmed legality executive order would little point plaintiffs continuing contest executive order federal judge seattle continue report the duranread more trump news at century wire trump filessupport our work by subscribing becoming a member
Your task is to classify the provided input as real or fake news. Label 0 is meant for fake news, Label 1 is for real news. TEXT: The Court Case Against the ‘Travel Ban’ Executive Order21st Century Wire says The legal battle is waging on over President Trump s Executive Order Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the US when on Saturday the Department of Justice requested a lift of the stay placed on enforcement of the Executive Order. The federal appeal court denied the DoJ s request, noting the the plaintiffs should first be given an opportunity to respond. Contrary to what many media outlets are saying, this was not a case of the courts saying that the order is  unconstitutional  as the ACLU and a number of Attorney Generals are claiming, but is standard practice in appeals cases.The Duran provides some further legal analysis on this developing case below  Alexander Mercouris The DuranThe legal moves and counter-moves in the court case concerning Donald Trump s  travel ban  Executive Order may appear complicated, but in reality they follow standard practice.  Since there are some misunderstandings in reporting them I will provide a brief explanation.The federal judge in Seattle on Friday did not rule that the Executive Order is unconstitutional or illegal.  Rather he ordered a temporary two week stay on the enforcement of the Executive Order until this question of its legality is decided in further argument before him in two weeks time.In doing so the judge acted fully within his powers, though as I understand it he took a different view from a different federal judge in Massachusetts who apparently refused to grant a similar stay when he was asked to do so at roughly the same time that the judge in Seattle was making his decision.The Department of Justice is appealing the stay.  It is doing so on the grounds that the Executive Order is fully legal and constitutional and needs to be brought back into force immediately in order to protect the US from potential terrorists, who might take advantage of the stay to enter the US during the two week period when it is in effect.On Saturday the Department of Justice asked the federal appeal court in San Francisco (which will hear the appeal) to lift the stay.  The federal appeal court however refused to do so, saying that the plaintiffs who applied for the stay should be given an opportunity to respond.  It gave the plaintiffs until Sunday (ie. today) to file their objections to the Department of Justice s application to lift the stay, with the Department of Justice instructed to file its counter-objections on Monday (ie. tomorrow).Contrary to some media claims, this is completely standard practice during appeals.  It would be very unusual for an appeal court to set aside a judge s order   even a temporary order   without a full hearing, and the Department of Justice will undoubtedly have known this when it applied to the appeal court to have the stay lifted on Saturday.The reason the Department of Justice made the application on Saturday is because it wants to emphasise to the appeal court the urgency of the situation.  This is important, not just because of the danger of terrorists entering the US during the period of the stay, but because unless the appeal court is convinced of the urgency of the situation it will simply say that the Department of Justice should wait until the hearing ordered by the federal judge in Seattle in two weeks time.In other words by insisting that the stay be lifted immediately the Department of Justice is providing reasons to the appeal court to take the case out of the federal judge s hands, so that it can decide the case itself.  That was the true purpose of the application on Saturday, and it succeeded.I expect the appeal court in San Francisco to decide the appeal this week, possibly as soon as Tuesday or Wednesday.As I am not an expert in US constitutional law I do not know what the outcome of the appeal will be.  I should say that it would be completely wrong to try to guess the outcome from the decision the appeal court took on Saturday.The appeal will be purely on the question of the rightness or otherwise of the stay.  If the appeal decision goes against the President it will be for the Department of Justice to put his case to the federal judge at the full hearing in two weeks time.  If that decision also goes against the President, he can appeal again to the federal appeal court in San Francisco, and beyond that to the Supreme Court.By contrast if the Department of Justice wins the appeal this week then I would expect the plaintiffs to drop the case in Seattle and try to go directly to the Supreme Court.  Since the appeal court would have effectively affirmed the legality of the Executive Order, there would be little point in the plaintiffs continuing to contest the Executive Order before the federal judge in Seattle Continue this report at The DuranREAD MORE TRUMP NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Trump FilesSUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @21WIRE.TVMiddle-east
Your task is to classify the provided input as real or fake news. Label 0 is meant for fake news, Label 1 is for real news. TEXT: the court case against travel ban executive century wire says the legal battle waging president trump executive order protecting nation from foreign terrorist entry into us saturday department justice requested lift stay placed enforcement executive order the federal appeal court denied doj request noting plaintiffs first given opportunity respond contrary many media outlets saying case courts saying order unconstitutional actu number attorney generals claiming standard practice appeals quran provides legal analysis developing case alexander mercouris the durante legal moves court case concerning donald trump travel ban executive order may appear complicated reality follow standard practice since misunderstandings reporting i provide brief federal judge seattle friday rule executive order unconstitutional illegal rather ordered temporary two week stay enforcement executive order question legality decided argument two weeks judge acted fully within powers though i understand took different view different federal judge massachusetts apparently refused grant similar stay asked roughly time judge seattle making department justice appealing stay it grounds executive order fully legal constitutional needs brought back force immediately order protect us potential terrorists might take advantage stay enter us two week period saturday department justice asked federal appeal court san francisco hear appeal lift stay the federal appeal court however refused saying plaintiffs applied stay given opportunity respond it gave plaintiffs sunday ie today file objections department justice application lift stay department justice instructed file monday ie tomorrow media claims completely standard practice appeals it would unusual appeal court set aside judge order even temporary order without full hearing department justice undoubtedly known applied appeal court stay lifted reason department justice made application saturday wants emphasise appeal court urgency situation this important danger terrorists entering us period stay unless appeal court convinced urgency situation simply say department justice wait hearing ordered federal judge seattle two weeks words insisting stay lifted immediately department justice providing reasons appeal court take case federal judge hands decide case that true purpose application saturday expect appeal court san francisco decide appeal week possibly soon tuesday i expert us constitutional law i know outcome appeal i say would completely wrong try guess outcome decision appeal court took appeal purely question brightness otherwise stay if appeal decision goes president department justice put case federal judge full hearing two weeks time if decision also goes president appeal federal appeal court san francisco beyond supreme contrast department justice wins appeal week i would expect plaintiffs drop case seattle try go directly supreme court since appeal court would effectively affirmed legality executive order would little point plaintiffs continuing contest executive order federal judge seattle continue report the duranread more trump news at century wire trump filessupport our work by subscribing becoming a member