A further appeals court in the US has upheld a block against President Donald Trump's second-iteration travel ban on Monday (12 June), further confounding the administration's attempts to temporarily ban citizens of certain countries from entering the country.

The 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Seattle, Washington upheld a decision by an appeals judge in Hawaii that had been largely based on campaign statements by the president which suggested the ban unconstitutionally discriminated against Muslims.

"The president's authority is subject to certain statutory and constitutional restraints." the Seattle judges wrote, saying that they thought the executive order went against US immigration laws which do not allow for discrimination based on nationality.

This second attempt by the administration at bringing in a travel ban follows the first ill-fated attempt that is generally considered to have been woefully mismanaged, leading to confused border rules, blockages and protests at airports, and people holding valid US visas being denied entry.

The new version now includes a provision allowing visa holders to still enter and takes Iraq off the list of countries - all Muslim majority - whose citizens would not be allowed to come to the US.

Much of the arguments heard by the court against the ban referenced Trump's campaign promise to institute a ban against Muslims entering the country; the ruling also referenced the president's Twitter account - where he wrote on 5 June that "we need a TRAVEL BAN for certain DANGEROUS countries, not some politically correct term that won't help us protect our people!"

The Supreme Court now has to look at whether or not they will hear arguments on the travel ban or whether to simply leave the block as it is. The highest court in the US is the last chance Trump has to push the ban through without again going through a new iteration.