A government lawyer defending US President Donald Trump's temporary entry ban on people from seven Muslim-majority countries came under intense scrutiny from a US federal appeals court that questioned whether it unfairly targeted people over their religion.
The three-judge 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals panel asked the Trump administration's lawyer tough questions about whether the administration had provided any evidence that people from the seven countries were a danger.
Judge Richard Clifton, a George W Bush appointee, posed equally tough questions for an attorney representing Minnesota and Washington states, which are challenging the ban.
Judge Clifton asked if a Seattle judge's suspension of Mr Trump's policy was "overbroad."
The 9th Circuit said at the end of the session that it would issue a ruling as soon as possible. Earlier, the court said it would likely rule this week but would not issue a same-day ruling.
The matter is ultimately likely to go to the US Supreme Court.
Mr Trump's 27 January order barred travellers from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen from entering for 90 days and all refugees for 120 days, except refugees from Syria, whom he would ban indefinitely.
Mr Trump, who took office on 20 January, has defended the measure, the most divisive act of his young presidency, as necessary for national security.
The order sparked protests and chaos at US and overseas airports in the weekend that followed.
A federal judge in Seattle, responding to the legal challenge, suspended the order last Friday.
August Flentje, special counsel for the US Justice Department, told the appellate panel that "Congress has expressly authorided the president to suspend entry of categories of aliens."
"That's what the president did here," Mr Flentje said at the start of a more than hour-long oral argument conducted by telephone and broadcast live online.
Individuals, states and civil rights groups challenging the ban said Mr Trump's administration had offered no evidence it answered a threat.
Opponents also assailed the ban as discriminatory against Muslims in violation of the US Constitution and applicable laws.
The states of Minnesota and Washington brought the case against the Trump administration.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
When the 9th Circuit asked Mr Flentje what evidence the executive order had used to connect the seven countries affected by the order with terrorism in the United States, he said the "proceedings have been moving very fast," without giving specific examples.
He said both Congress and the previous administration of Democrat Barack Obama had determined that those seven countries posed the greatest risk of terrorism and had in the past put stricter visa requirements on them.
"I'm not sure I'm convincing the court," Mr Flentje said at one point.
Noah Purcell, solicitor general for the state of Washington, began his argument urging the court to serve "as a check on executive abuses."
"The president is asking this court to abdicate that role here," Mr Purcell said. "The court should decline that invitation."
The judges pummeled both sides with questions.
Mr Clifton pushed for evidence that the ban discriminated against Muslims and said he was hearing more allegations than evidence.
"I don't think allegations cut it at this stage," Mr Clifton said.
Trump frequently promised during his 2016 election campaign to curb illegal immigration, especially from Mexico, and to crack down on Islamist violence.
Doubt cast over increase in border agents
Meanwhile, US Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly has said he does not expect to meet Mr Trump's hiring targets for border and immigration agents within the next two years.
Mr Trump has called for an additional 5,000 Customs and Border Protection agents and 10,0000 Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in an executive order, but he did not specify a timeline.
Mr Kelly told a congressional hearing that he would not "skip on training and standards" to speed up the pace of hiring.
He also said the US is not considering adding any countries to its list of seven whose nationals were temporarily banned from entering the country on visas.
Mr Kelly was responding to reports that the Trump administration was considering adding 12 countries to the list.
Trump's pick for labour secretary admits to employing illegal immigrant
Mr Trump's choice to lead the US Labor Department admitted to employing an undocumented immigrant as a house cleaner, the kind of revelation that derailed Cabinet nominees in previous administrations.
Andrew Puzder, chief executive officer of CKE Restaurants Inc, is one of several Trump nominees who face strong opposition from Senate Democrats and progressive groups.
In a statement, Mr Puzder said he and his wife had employed a housekeeper for a few years without being aware that she was not legally permitted to work in the United States.
"When I learned of her status, we immediately ended her employment and offered her assistance in getting legal status,"he said in the statement. He said he paid back taxes for employing the maid to the US Internal Revenue Service and to California.
The statement was first reported by the Huffington Post.
Senator Lamar Alexander, chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, the panel that will vet Mr Puzder's nomination, said in a statement that Mr Puzder had reported his mistake and voluntarily corrected it.
"I do not believe that this should disqualify him from being a cabinet secretary," he added.
