This article is from the source 'independent' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/hawaii-judge-donald-trump-travel-ban-muslim-countries-a7632366.html

The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Hawaii judge puts Donald Trump's revised travel ban on hold Hawaii judge puts Donald Trump's revised travel ban on hold
(35 minutes later)
A judge in Hawaii has issued a ruling to put President Donald Trump's revised travel ban on hold. Donald Trump’s wish to prevent citizens from six Muslim-majority countries from entering the US has suffered another set back, after a judge put his revised travel ban on hold.
US District Judge Derrick Watson's decision will prevent Mr Trump's executive order from going into effect nationwide on Thursday. Derrick Watson, a US district judge in Hawaii, ordered the stay just hours before Mr Trump’s order was due to come into effect. The nationwide ruling means that people should not be impacted by the the order.
Several states had tried to stop the executive order, the second attempt by the President to institute his travel ban after the first was stymied in the courts. Mr Watson was one of a several judges across the US that listened to legal arguments on Wednesday. Up to half-a-dozen states were seeking to block the executive order and judges in Maryland and the state of Washington also heard cases.
It would restrict travel from six Muslim-majority countries, and temporarily shut down the US refugee program. It would not apply to travellers who already have visas. Mr Trump had issued a revised travel ban after his first sparked international protests and suffered several legal setbacks from courts who judged it unconstitutional. He hoped the new order, which did not relate to Green Card holders and which removed references to a person’s religious, would be legally more protected.
Hawaii argued that the ban discriminates on the basis of nationality and would prevent Hawaii residents from receiving visits from relatives in the six mostly Muslim countries covered by the ban.  But activists said the new ban still discriminated not he ground of nationality and indeed religion.
The state also says the ban would harm its tourism industry and the ability to recruit foreign students and workers. Lawyers for the ACLU and other groups said that Mr Trump’s statements on the campaign trail during the election, and from his advisers since he took office, made clear the intention was to block Muslims.
Additional reporting by agencies The countries included in the measure were Iran, Libya, Syria, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen, and the order would have prevented them from entering the country for 90 day. 
Iraq was removed from the order after complaints from the Pentagon that Iraqis who had worked for the US military and who were in peril as a result, would suffer. There was also concern that the move would demoralise a nation at the forefront of the fight against Isis.
The island state, which has a Democratic governor and legislative assembly, had argued that Mr Trump’s revised order discriminated on the grounds of  
nationality and would prevent Hawaii residents from receiving visits from relatives in the six countries named in the ban. 
It also said the order would harm its crucial tourism industry and the ability to recruit foreign students and workers. 
The Associated Press said that a group of 58 tech companies, including Airbnb, Lyft and Dropbox, filed a “friend of the court' brief in the case saying the order hurt their ability to recruit the best talent from around the world.
A longer list of companies—that included giants like Apple, Facebook and Google—filed a brief opposing the first ban in a different court challenge brought by Washington state, which is ongoing.
During the election campaign, Mr Trump had promised to tighten immigration regulations. 
While his original order, signed on January 27, was considered racist and counter-productive by many, large number of the president’s supporters backed the move. Mr Trump himself questioned the professional of the judges who ruled against him.
On Wednesday night, Mr Trump’s spokesman, Sean Spicer, did not immediately respond to questions from reporters about the court decision.