The majority on the 9th Circuit panel said the Trump administration was likely to prevail in its arguments that it had legal authority to issue regulations to broaden the definition of what constituted someone likely to become dependent on public assistance.

“We find that the history of the use of ‘public charge’ in federal immigration law demonstrates that ‘public charge’ does not have a fixed, unambiguous meaning,” Judge Jay Bybee wrote, joined by Judge Sandra Ikuta. “Rather, the phrase is subject to multiple interpretations, it in fact has been interpreted differently, and the Executive Branch has been afforded the discretion to interpret it.”

“Whether the change in policy results from changing circumstances or a change in administrations, the wisdom of the policy is not a question we can review,” added Bybee, who, like Ikuta, was appointed by President George W. Bush.

The third judge on the panel, John Owens, dissented, saying he would have denied the stay and allowed the injunctions to remain in place pending more thorough review by the appeals court. The Barack Obama appointee noted that the government bears a “heavy burden” when seeking a stay of a lower court decision.

A Justice Department spokesman welcomed the appeals court’s action.

“The Department of Justice is pleased with today’s decision to lift the injunction and respect the legal authority vested in the administration by the U.S. Congress,” the spokesman said.

In addition to the 73-page majority decision granting the Trump administration’s stay request in the California and Oregon cases, Bybee penned a separate, five-page coda savaging Congress for decades of legislative inaction on immigration.

Declaring himself “perplexed and perturbed,” Bybee said the courts were being thrust to the center of the immigration fight in large part because lawmakers have abdicated their responsibilities.

“So far as we can tell from our modest perch in the Ninth Circuit, Congress is no place to be found in these debates. We have seen case after case come through our courts, serious and earnest efforts, even as they are controversial, to address the nation’s immigration challenges. Yet we have seen little engagement and no actual legislation from Congress,” Bybee wrote.

“It matters not to me as a judge whether Congress embraces or disapproves of the administration’s actions, but it is time for a feckless Congress to come to the table and grapple with these issues,” he added. “Don’t leave the table and expect us to clean up.”