>> President Donald Trump was in office just a week, when he ordered a 90 day travel ban on visitors to the US, from seven Middle Eastern and North African nations, siding emergency circumstances. The White House said the US government needed those 90 days to create new vetting procedures.
But after federal judges temporarily blocked the initial ban and then a second one, the issue will finally have a hearing in a US appeals court Monday. More than 100 days after the first order was suppose to go into effect. Reuters legal correspondent, Mica Rosenberg, says that could make the government case even more difficult.
>> Omar Jadwat from the American Civil Liberties Union, who's gonna be arguing the case on the Fourth Circuit, has said that this issue of the timing is an important one. Because it means that, it raises the question of what is the need for an emergency temporary measure? When we've had months and months for the government to be increasing their security protocols, increasing vetting standards.
What the government says is that they needed this 90 days to relieve the burden on the government. To be able to really look into the policies and practices and make sure that everything was in place. So they say, because of all of the court battles, it has delayed the process, and it is just hampering the types of security checks that they need to make.
>> The first ban, signed on January 27th was hastily announced and sparked chaos and protest at airports before being blocked by court rulings. A second order, signed March 6th, tried to overcome some of those challenges with revisions, but was also blocked by two federal judges before it could take effect.
>> The order he blocked was a watered down version of the first order, that was also blocked by another judge.>> On Monday Fourth Circuit US Court of Appeals in Virginia will hear arguments before a 14 judge panel,10 were appointed by Democrats, 4 by Republicans. The following week arguments will be heard before the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco.
The parallel proceedings the likelihood that both sides will appeal, and the high profile nature of the issue, all suggest the matter is headed for the US Supreme Court.