From those countries should not come to the u. S. , there will be a special exception for those individuals. Laura jared, explain what happened overnight. It started the Justice Department filing an emergency motion just after midnight and what they were asking for was to press pause on the seattle judges decision that halted the key provisions of the travel ban. Just three hours later this was overnight, the ninth circuit said no to the federal government. The federal court of appeals denied the Justice Departments request, and in a very short order early this morning, instead, as you said, they asked both sides to file legal briefs so they could hear more about the issues before they make a final decision on the emergency motion. Now, what this means practically speaking, is that the ruling by the federal judge in seattle, that sweeping one by judge james row bart sweeping the ban, and that remains in place for now. What is the timeline here . There are specific times given in this order, right . Thats right. So the next step we will see is the state attorney general will get a chance to respond to the government, and they will file a brief later tonight at 11 ni59, and then the u. S. Justice department will get a chance to file a reply brief at 3 00 p. M. On monday, and then we will see a hearing by the ninth circuit. Stay with us here. We want to bring in laura coates, a constitutional attorney, and paige paeut with us as well. She was talking about that timeline, and overall there are a lot of people in other countries watching this and trying to figure out if their visas will be valid for the long haul. How long do you believe it will take to work all of this out . Will it go to the Supreme Court . Thats possible. At this stage the ninth circuit asked for additional argument and briefings on the merits of this case, and this is important, and we had several Federal District courts to stop the ban, and nobody looked into the constitutional arguments and made one decision or another, and if you want to hold oral argument it could take a week or longer if the judges go back and forth on it. The department of justice in their appeal is arguing theres classified information here that makes this country unsafe and thats why we are gunning for this travel ban, so to speak, and we want to put the limits on it. How do you argue that . What do you say when you are talking about classified information that nobody else is privy to . You can do an incamera, and the reason they brought that information up, christi is because the president has a great deal of deference when it comes to the nations security, and they will have to balance that against the president ial power to determine who has entry into our country, and what they are doing is saying in my back pocket i have the golden ticket, and thats the prerogative to determine who comes in the country, and the briefing is what merits, this is an issue of National Security and an issue about whether the people arguing have a chance in court, and whether people have a right to come into our country. This is the core of our constitutional bedrock. The president has tweeted, based on my account in the last 22 hours, no less than ten times since this controversy started, and he has taken some shots at the judge in washington, of course, and we have had some response to that. Senator Patrick Leahy said this, he seems intent on bully and disparage yet another federal judge, and what do you make of the tweets and the openness that the president s page speaks so freely about, in terms of his criticism, and criticizing a decision is one thing but to disparage one is another . Yeah, we have never seen this, seeing a lifetime judge confirmed by the senate and calling him a socalled judge. We have not seen personal attacks by any other executive in the history of the country unless you want to look all the way back until we are going back precivil war days. I dont think its helpful to the legal arguments and the constitutional tea, and we are looking at judges who have decided to stop the executive order which was a priority with the administration. They are clearly upset and i think they ought to focus on the legal arguments and not the personal attacks. Victor was just talking about the u. S. Embassy official in baghdad saying they will now, quote, in the National Interest of the country allow Iraqi Special immigrant visa holders to travel into the u. S. Do you anticipate that when all of this is said and done there may be modifications to the travel ban as it stands now . We already started to see that, right . Think about what has happened over the last week since the president signed that executive order. We started out not really knowing where green card holders stood and they were going to have to get a special waiver, and then the white house walked that back earlier this week and said, no, no, the travel ban doesnt apply to green card holders, and now the ban is for certain visas, and its too early to tell what the final version of the order is going to look like. A loft people are weighing in on this, including a professor. I have criticized judges, and i wrote a whole book called insupreme justice. Its the nature of the criticism. President trump used words that seemed very injudicious, and very likely to alienate some of the appellant judges to sit on this, and these judges will decide the case on its merits, and i think in the end the stay will be, at least, partly lifted, because parts of the executive order are constitutional. Do you agree . I think thats right, that some parts will be lifted. Of course, you are right, the president of the United States, its his prerogative to speak on other branches. Remember, we have three equal parts of the government, and the judicial has to be even, and the nominee his career has been about whether he separates powers and the judiciary remains that, and not every part of the order was struck down or halted by the seattle judge, only the parts that have the leanings in terms of the establishment clause and other entities. You dont have a sweeping ban, you have one that points to what may be a constitutional battle before the Supreme Court as the parts that have been halted. So paige, quickly, for people who are sitting in other countries with valid visas trying to determine, do i try to get to the u. S. Or dont i at this point, how would you advise them . Based on the actions that the administration has taken so far, Customs Border patrol seems intent on allowing those individuals to come into the United States, so i think if you have legal status if you are a citizen or legal permanent resident or hold a valid visa, the only consistent thing about all of this is all of the judges that looked at this particular thing and even the administration is allowing those individuals to come into the country, and if you do not have legal status its a different situation and i would not encourage anybody to get on a plane and head this way. We appreciate your voices in all of this. Thank you. We will talk about the political consequences of this protracted battle over the president s executive order, and also President Trump praising russian president , Vladimir Putin, and appearing to criticize the u. S. In the process. Afoot and lighthearted i take to the open road. Healthy, free, the world before me, the long brown path before me leading wherever i choose. The east and the west are mine. The north and the south are mine. All seems beautiful to me. Why pause a spontaneous moment . Cialis for daily use treats ed and the urinary symptoms of bph. Tell your doctor about your medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. Do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, or adempas® for pulmonary hypertension, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. Do not drink alcohol in excess. To avoid longterm injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. If you have a sudden decrease or loss of hearing or vision, or an allergic reaction, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. Ask your doctor about cialis. May not always be clear. But at t. Rowe price, we can help guide your retirement savings. So wherever your Retirement Journey takes you, we can help you reach your goals. Call us or your advisor t. Rowe price. Invest with confidence. The rest of the world. Fades away. So i got you something that stands out as beautifully. As you do. Le vian at jared. Jared works directly with le vian designers to bring you more exclusive pieces. Than any other Jewelry Store in the world. Like the le vian ombre bracelet. Featuring le vian chocolate diamonds. The one gift. As unique as she is. President s executive order, and thats why he went to jared. Lets talk about the protracted legal fight over the president s executive order now. We have with us jack kingston, and scott bolden, and david rucker, Senior Correspondent from the washington examiner. Lets start by going into the dojs appeal, and theres breaking news overnight that the ban is still blocked for now until the circuit the Appellant Court in the ninth circuit gets more information from each side. Lets put up here full screen one here. Judicial second guessing of the National Security determination in itself poses substantial harm on the federal government and nation at large. First, congressman, to you on that, how does this pose a substantial harm to the nation . Well, i think in terms of the president s right under code section 1182, the president does have the right to determine which aliens could be a threat to the nation and limit their access to our country, and so i think that what he is saying is we have seven countries, which the Obama Administration designated as countries of concern because they dont have proper vetting, and inaccurate documentation and so forth, and under that section 1182, the president can limit access to the United States of america from that, and thats where they are probably coming from. Scott, to you, they phrase it or characterize it as secondguessing. What do you make of the statement, that claim from the department of justice . Well, its checks and balances, and the judiciary is an independent part of our threeparty government. The reality is the president has lost the authori the authority on this, but not so much so it would violate the constitution, where it as a duh skreupl discriminatory impact. So look at it this way. The position between president ial power and the constitution f. You violate the constitution or if we dont follow our own rules and regs, the judiciary can strike that down, and so far right now the ninth circuit as well as 11 of 12 judicial districts sided with the states on this. David, we spoke yesterday with Pennsylvania Republican congressman, charlie dett, so listen to what he said. The threats can come from everywhere, and not just these seven countries trees, but there is problems in those seven countries and others that we have to contend with, and lets take a broader perspective, and the order in my view was overly broad, rushed and not properly considered and vetted. How pervasive in that sentiment in the president s party in congress . I think there was a lot of disappointment that they rushed this through and did not cross all their ts and got their is. They did not understand enough about what it was doing because there was not enough communication and they felt ultimately that it was not vetted, an interesting term here, because of what we are dealing with, because they were not thorough enough, probably because they did not have a attorney general or secretary in place, so i think the administration would have had more support initially, and i would not be surprised to see the congressional action if the battle continues. The judiciary doesnt like to get in the way by things passed by the congress and signed by the president , but as we saw with president obama, when you get too liberal with the executive orders, thats when the courts are more likely to reign in the president. Stay with us and well talk about the other side of the break about some of the controversial comments from President Trump about Vladimir Putin and about truth and honesty from the president. Well be right back. Because going around is rarely ever as enjoyable. As going right through. One of many pieces in my life. So when my asthma symptoms kept coming back on my longterm control medicine. I talked to my doctor and found a missing piece in my asthma treatment with breo. Oncedaily breo prevents asthma symptoms. Breo is for adults with asthma not well controlled on a longterm asthma control medicine, like an inhaled corticosteroid. Breo wont replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. Breo is specifically designed to open up airways to improve breathing for a full 24 hours. Breo contains a type of medicine that increases the risk of death from asthma problems and may increase the risk of hospitalization in children and adolescents. Breo is not for people whose asthma is well controlled on a longterm asthma control medicine, like an inhaled corticosteroid. Once your asthma is well controlled, your doctor will decide if you can stop breo and prescribe a different asthma control medicine, like an inhaled corticosteroid. Do not take breo more than prescribed. See your doctor if your asthma does not improve or gets worse. Ask your doctor if 24hour breo could be a missing piece for you. Learn more about better breathing at mybreo. Com. Do you respect putin . I do respect him. Why . I respect a lot of people but that doesnt mean i will get along with him. Hes the leader of his country. I say its better to get along with russia than not. Will i get along with him, i have no idea. Hes a killer, putin is a killer. Theres a lot of killers. You think our country is so innocent. The full interview will air later today, and back with us today, our guests. Congressman, first to you, i want you to respond to something from a congressman shift, and does he not see the damage he does with comments like that, and a gift that he gives to russian propaganda. What is your response . I think adam is shooting very straight here. I dont think theres a similarity between the United States and russia. Its a disappointing statement. The reality is that putin has a lot of tendencies that our thuggery, as Lindsay Graham has called him, and the reality is respecting putin is a different matter, and working with putin is a different manner, and condoning putin and saying hes accurate similar to us is not accurate at all. This goes back to the beginning of the president ial campaign. Trump has always been deferential towards russia and putin, and he previously has been creating a moral equivalence between the United States and how it operates in the world and how russia operates in the world, so this is nothing new. The president doesnt hesitate to get tough rhetorically with other u. S. Adversaries, china in particular, and theres nothing wrong with taking an adversarial tone at all, and so i think the question here that the president needs to answer once we get past all of this, sort of, you know, fury, is of course we want a good working relationship with a major power. That is sort of necessary for us in our position in the world, but on whose terms is the question that needs to be answered. If we are dealing with russia on our terms, then thats something people should welcome. If we are being deferential to russia and putin and working on their terms, thats a matter of u. S. Foreign policy that should be concerning. Lets get your reaction on Something Else during an interview with fox news. This is over the suggestion that there arent facts to back up some of the things and statements that come from the president. Watch. Is there any validity to the criticism of you that you say things you cant back up fact l factually, and as the president , you say there are 3 million illegal aliens that voted and then you dont have the data to back you up and some people say thats irresponsible for a president to say that . Well, many people have come out and said i am right, you know that. But you have to have data to back that up. When you see illegals, people not citizens, and they are on the registration rolls. We can be babies, and you take a look at the registration, and you have illegals and dead people, and its really a bad situation, its really bad. Scott . Its just pure hyperbole, political hyperbole, and he never answered the question. Remember, hes not a candidate for president , he is the president now, and he continues to talk in political hyperbole, which i think is very dangerous. As i said before, he drives this narrative, and again there are no facts to support 3 Million People voting illegally in this election or other election and theres imperical data to support the opposite. He and his supporters defend this. The real corruption in our political system is the Voter Suppression that takes place in federal judges struck down Voter Suppression laws in North Carolina and others. Thats the real reality. We have to keep them accountable when the political hyperbole becomes alternate facts and alternate reality. Thats very important. Where is this Major Investigation that the president said that he i think cracking down on voter fraud is in everybodys interest, and i think you are going to have to do it with the State Government since they run the elections. I think in terms of him saying things often that he, like any other politician, may Say Something with a little bit of a stretch in it, but i still think that in terms of that issue of voter fraud, theres an issue that is out there, and i think often when you peel back what he has said, there is a reason that he comes up with these numbers and so often the i would say the