Even if the 4th Circuit gives President Donald Trump the green light to proceed with his revised travel ban order, he faces other legal obstacles. | Getty Appeals court sets May argument on revised Trump travel ban

A federal appeals court has set arguments for May 8 on the validity of a key aspect of President Donald Trump’s revised travel ban executive order.

However, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals signaled Thursday that it could rule even sooner on the federal government’s request for a stay of a Maryland-based federal district court judge’s order halting the Trump directive’s ban on issuance of visas to six Muslim-majority countries.


The Richmond-based appeals court set a schedule to complete filings on the Trump administration’s stay request by April 5, suggesting that a ruling on that could come early next month.

Even if the 4th Circuit gives Trump the green light to proceed with his revised travel ban order, he faces other legal obstacles. A federal judge in Hawaii blocked two full sections of the order, including the visa limits, a 120-day suspension of refugee admissions to the U.S. from around the globe, and some studies the president directed on vetting of visitors to the U.S.

The Justice Department has not yet appealed that ruling. Instead, federal government lawyers appear to be moving forward with another round of legal proceedings in the Hawaii court.

The Maryland suit was brought by refugee assistance organizations and several individuals, while the Hawaii litigation was filed by the State of Hawaii and the imam of a local Muslim association.

Cases are also pending in several other jurisdictions across the country, with at least one judge presently mulling a request for a preliminary injunction blocking Trump’s revised executive order in its entirety.

The federal government asked the 4th Circuit to consider the stay request and the merits of the appeal in parallel, but the refugee groups opposed that request, saying the stay issue should be teed up first. The appeals court appears to have sided with the groups on that point, although the expedited schedule for the stay was granted on the schedule the government proposed.