- Second Federal Court to Review Trump’s Travel Ban
- Trump's Travel Ban Is Back in Court
- Palestinians Shift Strategy, Playing National Security Card With Trump
The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear arguments in its Seattle courthouse on Monday.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Virginia is considering a similar ruling.
The U.S. Supreme Court could take up the issue if the appeals courts issue contradictory decisions.
The three 9th Circuit judges are:
Michael Daly Hawkings, 72.
Clinton, a Democrat, appointed Hawkins in 1994 after Hawkins served as Arizona's top federal prosecutor from 1977 to 1980 and as a U.S. Marine Corps judge deciding court martials from 1973 to 1976.
Hawkins was in private practice for 14 years before Clinton appointed him.
In 2012. Hawkins joined Judge Stephen Reinhardt's majority ruling striking down California's gay marriage ban. It was the first federal appeals court ruling that determined gay marriage bans were unconstitutional. The U.S. Supreme Court, in another case, ruled similarly three years later.
Ronald Gould, 70.
Clinton appointed Gould in 1999. After clerking for U.S. Supreme Court Judge Potter Stewart from 1974 to 1975, Gould joined the prominent law firm Perkins Coie, where he remained until his appointment to the bench.
Gould listens to oral arguments electronically from his Seattle court because of multiple sclerosis.
In 2014, he wrote the majority decision that high schools must provide the same athletic amenities to girls as boys. The ruling expanded the U.S Department of Education's so-called Title IX mandate to treat male and female college athletes the same.
Richard Paez, 70.
Clinton elevated Paez to the appeals court from federal district court in Los Angeles in 1999. Clinton had appointed Paez to the district court five years earlier after Paez spent 13 years as a state judge in California.
Before he became a judge, Paez worked as a staff attorney for the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, Western Center on Law and Poverty and California Rural Legal Assistance.
He wrote the majority opinion in 2011 that Arizona lawmakers went too far when they enacted strict immigration regulations, including making it a state crime to lack immigration papers. The U.S. Supreme Court later ruled similarly.