A second U.S. federal court has voted to uphold a block on President Donald Trump's executive order restricting travel from six mostly Muslim countries.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled unanimously Monday against Trump's temporary ban, on the grounds that the president overstepped his authority when he issued his March 2 executive order.

The three-judge panel said that while the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act gives the president broad powers to both control entrants to the United States and protect U.S. security, "immigration, even for the president, is not a one-person show."

Monday's decision echoes a previous ruling by the Virginia-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which on May 25 upheld a Maryland judge's ruling blocking parts of the order. But the two courts made very different arguments.

The 4th Circuit focused largely on statements and tweets made by President Trump that indicated his order was a ban on Muslims, something he advocated during his campaign for president. But the 4th Circuit was only ruling on the portion of the law restricting travel from the six countries for 90 days. The 9th Circuit ruled more broadly and focused on the INA and what the judges saw as insufficient justification to support the travel order.

The Trump administration has appealed the 4th Circuit ruling to the Supreme Court, asking for immediate relief from restraining orders issued on both coasts.

The travel order that was the subject of Monday's ruling is a second attempt by the Trump administration. The first was withdrawn after it, too, was stayed by a district court. That stay also was upheld by the 9th Circuit.

第二家聯(lián)邦上訴法院的法官通過表決，維持暫停執(zhí)行美國總統(tǒng)川普頒布的限制來自六個以穆斯林為主要人口的國家民眾的旅行禁令。

星期一，舊金山的第九聯(lián)邦巡回上訴法院一致決定，暫停執(zhí)行川普頒布的臨時旅行禁令，判決的主要理由是，3月2日川普發(fā)布 《保護美國防止外國恐怖分子進(jìn)入美國》的行政令逾越了他的權(quán)限。

這個由三名法官組成的合議庭表示，雖然美國《移民與國籍法》給予總統(tǒng)廣泛的權(quán)力來控制誰能進(jìn)出美國并且保護美國安全，“移民事務(wù)，即便對美國總統(tǒng)來說，也不是獨角戲。”

星期一的這項裁決與位于維吉尼亞州的第四聯(lián)邦巡回上訴法院在5月25日作出的裁決類似。在那項裁決中，第四聯(lián)邦巡回上訴法院維持了馬里蘭州一位聯(lián)邦法官下達(dá)的禁止執(zhí)行旅行禁令部分內(nèi)容的裁決。但是兩個法院的裁判理由非常不同。

第四巡回上訴法院主要聚焦在川普總統(tǒng)的表態(tài)和推特，指出這些言論顯示出，禁令是針對穆斯林的。川普在競選美國總統(tǒng)期間曾倡導(dǎo)要頒布這樣的禁令。第四巡回上訴法院的裁決所涵蓋的只是旅行禁令的部分內(nèi)容，也就是九十天內(nèi)禁止來自六個以穆斯林為主要人口的國家的人入境的規(guī)定。第九巡回法院則做出更廣泛的判決，談及了《移民與國籍法》和法院認(rèn)為不足以合理支持旅行禁令的理由。

川普政府已經(jīng)就第四巡回上訴法院的裁判上訴至最高法院，請求最高法院立即移除東西兩岸法院下達(dá)的禁制令。

周一判決針對的是川普政府第二次發(fā)布的旅行禁令。第一次發(fā)布的禁令被一家聯(lián)邦地區(qū)法院裁判暫停執(zhí)行，第九巡回上訴法院維持了那項裁決。

A second U.S. federal court has voted to uphold a block on President Donald Trump's executive order restricting travel from six mostly Muslim countries.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled unanimously Monday against Trump's temporary ban, on the grounds that the president overstepped his authority when he issued his March 2 executive order.

The three-judge panel said that while the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act gives the president broad powers to both control entrants to the United States and protect U.S. security, "immigration, even for the president, is not a one-person show."

Monday's decision echoes a previous ruling by the Virginia-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which on May 25 upheld a Maryland judge's ruling blocking parts of the order. But the two courts made very different arguments.

The 4th Circuit focused largely on statements and tweets made by President Trump that indicated his order was a ban on Muslims, something he advocated during his campaign for president. But the 4th Circuit was only ruling on the portion of the law restricting travel from the six countries for 90 days. The 9th Circuit ruled more broadly and focused on the INA and what the judges saw as insufficient justification to support the travel order.

The Trump administration has appealed the 4th Circuit ruling to the Supreme Court, asking for immediate relief from restraining orders issued on both coasts.

The travel order that was the subject of Monday's ruling is a second attempt by the Trump administration. The first was withdrawn after it, too, was stayed by a district court. That stay also was upheld by the 9th Circuit.

第二家聯(lián)邦上訴法院的法官通過表決，維持暫停執(zhí)行美國總統(tǒng)川普頒布的限制來自六個以穆斯林為主要人口的國家民眾的旅行禁令。

星期一，舊金山的第九聯(lián)邦巡回上訴法院一致決定，暫停執(zhí)行川普頒布的臨時旅行禁令，判決的主要理由是，3月2日川普發(fā)布 《保護美國防止外國恐怖分子進(jìn)入美國》的行政令逾越了他的權(quán)限。

這個由三名法官組成的合議庭表示，雖然美國《移民與國籍法》給予總統(tǒng)廣泛的權(quán)力來控制誰能進(jìn)出美國并且保護美國安全，“移民事務(wù)，即便對美國總統(tǒng)來說，也不是獨角戲。”

星期一的這項裁決與位于維吉尼亞州的第四聯(lián)邦巡回上訴法院在5月25日作出的裁決類似。在那項裁決中，第四聯(lián)邦巡回上訴法院維持了馬里蘭州一位聯(lián)邦法官下達(dá)的禁止執(zhí)行旅行禁令部分內(nèi)容的裁決。但是兩個法院的裁判理由非常不同。

第四巡回上訴法院主要聚焦在川普總統(tǒng)的表態(tài)和推特，指出這些言論顯示出，禁令是針對穆斯林的。川普在競選美國總統(tǒng)期間曾倡導(dǎo)要頒布這樣的禁令。第四巡回上訴法院的裁決所涵蓋的只是旅行禁令的部分內(nèi)容，也就是九十天內(nèi)禁止來自六個以穆斯林為主要人口的國家的人入境的規(guī)定。第九巡回法院則做出更廣泛的判決，談及了《移民與國籍法》和法院認(rèn)為不足以合理支持旅行禁令的理由。

川普政府已經(jīng)就第四巡回上訴法院的裁判上訴至最高法院，請求最高法院立即移除東西兩岸法院下達(dá)的禁制令。

周一判決針對的是川普政府第二次發(fā)布的旅行禁令。第一次發(fā)布的禁令被一家聯(lián)邦地區(qū)法院裁判暫停執(zhí)行，第九巡回上訴法院維持了那項裁決。