U.S. President Donald Trump has hit back at a federal judge, after they temporarily blocked his controversial immigration ban.
U.S. District Senior Judge James Robart of Seattle issued a nationwide restraining order on Friday, which blocked the travel ban put in place by President Trump last week, USA Today reports.
The ban, which was created through an executive order, attempted to block people from seven majority-Muslim countries from entering the United States.
The countries affected included Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Libya and Yemen, with Trump also suspending the U.S. refugee programme globally.
US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) are believed to have told airlines that they are allowed to board passengers who had been barred from entering the country.
In response, Trump wrote a series of tweets this afternoon condemning the judge’s decision and branding it as ‘ridiculous’.
He added that the opinion of this ‘so-called judge’ will be overturned.
White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer released a statement following the ruling last night, saying the government will file an emergency stay of this ‘outrageous order’.
He went on to defend the executive order, claiming that it was ‘lawful and appropriate’. A revised statement was soon released, which removed the word ‘outrageous’.
Attorney General Bob Ferguson of Washington State, which was one of the first two states to sue over the order, said the travel ban significantly harms its residents and mandates discrimination.
He said:
Judge Robart’s decision, effective immediately … puts a halt to President Trump’s unconstitutional and unlawful executive order. The law is a powerful thing — it has the ability to hold everybody accountable to it, and that includes the president of the United States.
The Trump administration have had to justify its actions on numerous occasions, claiming time and time again that the ban is on national security grounds.
However, its opponents have branded the move as ‘unconstitutional’ and believe it targets people based on their religious beliefs.
Judge Robart questioned the administration’s use of the September 11 attacks on the United States as a justification for the ban.
He asked the federal government lawyer, Michelle Bennett, if there had been any terrorist attacks by people from the seven counties listed in Mr Trump’s order since 9/11, to which Bennet said she didn’t know.
“The answer is none. You’re here arguing we have to protect from these individuals from these countries, and there’s no support for that,” Judge Robart replied.
He added that for the order to be constitutional, it had to be ‘based in fact, as opposed to fiction’.
