Minister mark rutte loses seats, but will likely return to power after seeing off the challenge of Geert Wilders. Eruption on mount etna in sicily. Hello, im katty kay in washington, Christian Fraser is in london. For the second time in two months, Federaljudges Have blocked President Trumps attempt to impose a travel ban on six mainly muslim countries. Earlier this month, the white house issued a new travel order which removed some of the more contentious elements from the first one. But two judges, one from hawaii another from maryland, took the unusual step of referring back to the president s comments during the Election Campaign evidence they said that his order was still designed to discriminate against muslims. Donald] trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown on muslims entering the United States, until our countrys representatives can figure out what the hell is going on later in the campaign, mr. Trump backed away from his call for a total muslim ban. But thejudge in hawaii appears to conclude that mr. Trumps true motivations lie in those earlier remarks. At a rally in nashville the president said the ruling was terrible. This ruling makes us look weak which by thewaywe no longelarl believe me just look at our borders. We are going to fight this terrible ruling, we are going to take our case as far as it needs to go, including all the way up to the supreme court. We are going to win, were going to keep our citizens safe and regardless, were going to keep our citizens safe, believe me. The president s critics have wasted no time in drawing attention to his problems. Senator Elizabethe Warren tweeted this well in the last hour the White House Communications with us to discuss is legal professorjonathan turley, from the George Washington university. Is this religious discrimination, the travel ban . Frankly, i dont think. Case the travel ban . Frankly, i dont think Case Law The Travel Ban . Frankly, i dont think. Case law supports the think the case law supports the opinion. The Ninth Circuit made the on due process. This is based ruling on due process. This is based on different courts. So in some ways this is opening up a new legal front. But the case law doesnt really favour the court that much on Something Like this. And the court was light on analysis. It was was light on case analysis. It was long on the rhetoric and discussion of the president s Campaign State m e nts of the president s campaign s of the president s Campaign Statementsegeee statements made by statements and statements made by his aides. That is usually not something that courts place so much ezfl eii something that courts place so much ,fcp, on. I something that courts place so much eipfg; on. You have said in something that courts place so much gig . . . On. You have said in the emphasis on. You have said in the past that you dont agree with the travel ban, now stick your legal hat back on, is there a legal case to be made do you think, they have used the Campaign Rhetoric of the president to back up their case, is there do you think another legal case to be made or not . Well, i tell you, i would have to bet on the president on both due process and on eyesieeee fee. L254; 2. E. Eeeeex. ,. 4 ,. Religious clauses and the religious clauses and establishment. The case law is strong here, it is interesting that each of the decisions basically ignores the other counts, focuses on if . And ignores the other counts, focuses on e and different ignores the other counts, focuses on if . And different aspects. I ignores the other counts, focuses on e and different aspects. I didnt one and different aspects. I didnt find the opinion that convincing. What i felt was convincing was the Administration Needs discipline and people are saying things public they undermining their case. But a are undermining their case. But a lot of courts would be uneasy in having a case of this importance l ll lee ll ll. L . . . L e . L. L. L. Turn llll l llll ll ll. L lllllllll turn on Campaign Statements. Particularly Campaign Statements that you noted went back and forth and were fluid. Ban was and were fluid. This ban was supposed to come into play today and supposedto Come Interplaytodayand it wont. Talk us through a bit now it wont. Talk us through a bit of the, what goes on from here, the of the, what goes on from here, the timetable l. Of the, what goes on from here, the gig table of. Of the, what goes on from here, the gig table of how long will the ban time table of how long will the ban be frozen and how long will people who want to get into the United States, how long will they have to get in . Well the fist step would be for the administration to move to the Ninth Circuit, hawaii is in the circuit. There is a Standing Case that was never overturned that that was never overtumedihat the challengers. They may favours the challengers. They may have favoured the decision that came down. They can say this is a different order and written differently and dropped some of the issues and we want you to look on issues and we want you toleekfl on issues and we want you toleekflee on an emergency basis. They this on an emergency basis. They would do that. Whether they would win isa would do that. Whether they would win is a good question. But this is a case clearly being groomed for the supreme court. They re a case clearly being groomed for the supreme court. Theyre going to take it all the way. Is that weeks or it could be weeks for the month . It could be weeks for the Ninth Circuit, but months for the supreme court. They may want to supreme court. They may not want to move and wait until there is a Ninth Justice who is a strong executive power record. Thank you very much. Reinforce that the president needs a win somewhere and he has a problem with his travel ban and with the obama care replacement and wire tapping and there are problems every where . What the processor said professor said is interesting, the majority of legal opinions believe the president has the law on his side. The Executive Powers in protecting the borders seem to be at their zenith. That not matter for this president , if politically for this president , if this plays out over months that is months of distraction from the kinds of things that the president needs to get done. There are no legislative achievements so far for this white house. We are talking about travel bans and that kind of thing, they and he is losing on that fronts, he needs to have a win and he needs to have some concrete actions that he can say, listen, i have passed laws and made differences. The other thing is that words have consequences. Sometimes you think the president doesnt seem to understand that or doesnt care, but the implications of his words when he is in the oval office are greater and that is what the judges have ruled. What the greater and that is what the judges have [m what the judge in hawaii have ruled. What thejudge in hawaii said is statements on the campaign m i have an impact and it is trail have an impact and it is interesting the of interesting the psychology of President Trump is fascinating, he could say what he wanted when he was ce of his company. Now he is president of the United States. And people need to trust these words. In the last hour, the republican and Democratic Leaders of the Senate Intelligence committee announced they have found no evidence to support President Trumps claim the Obama Administration tapped his phones during the 2016 devin nunes, the republican chair of the the house intelligece committee, made a similar statement yesterday. So two seperate inquiries and nothing to suggest there was any surveillance of mr trumps phones. So, is the president going to let it drop . No, hes not. Take a look at some of the things written about about wiretapping and eavesdropping and dont forget when i say wiretap, those words were in quotes, because wiretapping is pretty Old Fashioned stuff, but it covers surveillance and many other things. And nobody ever talks about the fact that it was in quotes, but wiretap covers a lot of things, i think youre going to find some interesting items coming to the forefront over the next two weeks. Im ata im at a loss now, he can pick up the phone, he can end this now and ring up and declassify the documents, there have been two inquiries and we get this sort of refrain, in two weeks, Something Else will happen, so he kicks it Down The Line and it rue the Down The Line and it muckies the waters and the congress on both sides are getting tired of it. It is a distraction, all this in Quotation Stuff and whether it was ifnff afifi whether if wai l oi ifnff afifi whether if wai l or wire tapping muddies surveillance or wire tapping muddies the waters, but what the president said in his tweet four times in four separate tweets is indisputable. Said in his tweet four times in four separate tweets is indisputablem you look at that, it doesnt say wire tapping. Inverted commas. You look at that, it doesnt say wire tapping. Inverted commasm doesnt matter whether it is in inverted commas, it is what the president wrote. You said words matter and we have had the president p matter and we have had the president op the size of his inauguration crowd, the millions who he said voted illegally for which there is no evidence, on this wire tap, for which there is no evidence, a g which there is no evidence, a by partisan pairing l the senate said partisan pairing in the senate said there is no evidence. The he there is no evidence. The more he does this and say things for which there is no evidence that can be proven to be false, that has consequences for him in his legislation, because republicans are losing patience with it. That is where he has his problems. And remember the timing, this was just the day afterjeff sessions recused himself from the russian affair. Now sean spicer has been speaking. The president s Executive Order false within his Lawful Authority in seeking to protect our nations security. And the department will continue. Defend his executive continue to defend his Executive Order in the courts. The department is exploring all options to defend this order, we intend to appeal the flawed rulings. The Department Of Justice is determining the strategy and timing and we expect action to be taken soon and seek clarification of the order prior to the of the order prior to appeal. The danger is real and the law is clear. The president was to change the president was elected to change out the president was elected to change our broken Immigration System and will continue to exercise his authority and president ial responsibility to protect our nation. And just before i get to your questions and then before introduce director mull vainy, i was asked on the enforcement of the president s order to restrict lobbying activities of executive Branch Members and i said i would get back tojohn. The Executive Order itself has a section, 5, which focuses on enforcement and each agency works with Government Ethics to establish procedures for determining of the the determining violations of the the pledge. Sean spicer speaking about the travel ban and showing they are going to fight this all the way. Yes, saying what we were saying and what professor tu rley was yes, saying what we were saying and what professor turley was saying that they believe the law is on their side on this one. Now to scotland. Theres an escalating dispute today between the british Prime Minister and scotlands First Minister on the question of a second referendum on Scottish Independence. Theresa may said earlier today that now was not the time to be considering another vote. Instead she wants to focus on the complicated brexit negotiations. When the snp, the Scottish Government, say it is time to Start Talking about a second Scottish Independence referendum, i say that, just at this point, all of our energies should be focused on our negotiations with the European Union about our future relationship, and to be talking about an independence referendum would, i think, make it more difficult for us to be able to get the right deal for scotland and for the uk. And Nicola Sturgeons response . Its not up to westminster to disregard the democ reticll ll. Mandate in scotland. Lets have a listen. We have a conservative government with one mp in scotland saying they will stand in the way of the choice of the scottish people. I mean, this is like winding the clock back to the bad old days of Margaret Thatcher. It is an argument for independence really in a nutshell that westminster thinks its got the right to block the democratically elected mandate of Scottish Government and the majority in the Scottish Parliament. History may look back on today and see it as the day that the fate of the union was sealed. Lets go now to westminster and speak to alex forsyth, our political correspondent. The language is the most interesting thing in that statement from Nicola Sturgeon, invoking the memory of Margaret Thatcher from 30 years ago and talking of the fate of the union Margaret Thatcher from 30 years ago and the ing of the fate of the union Margaret Thatcher from 30 years ago and the tories he fate of the union Margaret Thatcher from 30 years ago and the tories who ate of the union Margaret Thatcher from 30 years ago and the tories who of of the union Margaret Thatcher from 30 years ago and the tories who of course union Margaret Thatcher from 30 years ago and the tories who of course are n Margaret Thatcher from 30 years ago and the tories who of course are not particularly liked in scotland among particularly liked in scotland among particular sex of society. It a particular sex of society. It makes you think it is going to be difficult for these two women to get together and get the best out of the brexit negotiation. Theyre in a high stakes game and almost a stand off, because theresa may said what she did unexpectedly and didnt warn Nicola Sturgeon, the First Minister of scotland, what she was going to say and what she said was Nicola Sturgeon, you want a second independence referendum, by the spring of 2019, that is before the uk leaves the eu and theresa may said that is not the right time for it. She was careful not to reject the possibility outright, because the possibility outright, because the argument of Nicola Sturgeon that is could fuel the case for independence if westminster was seen as blocking something which the Scottish Parliament wanted. Theresa may picked her words carefully, but both are in a real political gamble, theresa may thinking she can play to the will of the scottish people and say we dont want more division. Nicola sturgeon thinking she can do the same, but persuade them that their rights are being eroded by westminster. It is going to be a case of one having to back down and we dont know who. Thank very we dont know who. Thank you very much. Here in the United States it is congress that controls the money. But the Budget Proposal written by the white house is a marker of how the president intends to rule. And you will seefr om this first increase in Military Spending and stark cuts across much of the rest of the government. So lets take a look at the winners and losers. The biggest loserrof all is they will see a 31 cut in funding that wipes out over 50 programmes and over 3000 jobs. The State Department will see a cut of 29 . And both the agriculture and labour departments will see cuts of 21 each. In all, there are cuts to 15 departments the savings will raise 11. 3 billion dollars of new funding over the next two years for the wall on the mexican border. Just a fraction of what will be needed to complete