welcome to bbc news, broadcasting to viewers in north america and around the globe. the top stories: a major legal setback for donald trump. federal appeals court refuses to reinstate his travel ban. see you in court. the president hits back, saying the security of our nation is at stake. at punch—up in south africa's parliament over president zuma's state of nations speech. and the cost of conservation. the indian wildlife park, where local people say they are paying the price. good to have you with us. the federal appeals court in san francisco has refused to reinstate president trump's band of people

from seven mainly muslim countries entering the us. it unanimously rejected the administration's claim of presidential authority and questioned its motives. the band was suspended last week by a judge in seattle after two us states and it was unconstitutional. —— ban. moments after the ruling was released president trump responded defiantly, tweeting: a little later he had this to say about the decision. it isa it is a political decision and we will see them in court. you believe it is the wrong decision? we have a situation where the security of our country is at stake and it's a very serious situation, so we look forward as i just serious situation, so we look forward as ijust said to seeing them in court. this is a decision that came down, but we are going to win the case. have you conferred

with your new attorney general? no, we just heard. with your new attorney general? no, wejust heard. how with your new attorney general? no, we just heard. how did you find out? we just saw, just like you did. in a media? it is a decision we will win, in my opinion, very easily. the washington state attorney general who initially filed the lawsuit against mr trump said, we have seen in court twice. he then explained the importance of the ruling. the law is not an instruction. this is fundamental to who we are as a people. when an executive order is adopted like this with little thought, little planning, little oversight, that creates chaos throughout our country that has a real impact on people's lives here and abroad. real impacts. as attorneys and as professional staff who work for a public law firm at this, we keep this in mind every

day, that it may seem like, what's going on? that procedural stuff. kind that procedural stuff and those co nsta nt kind that procedural stuff and those constant revisions, at the end of the day it is about people's lives and the impact on their lives and the future of our country and our constitution. let's go live to david willis, who joins us from washington. this is a pretty big defeat for the president, isn't it? it is. and you are right, president donald trump is learning very early on in his presidency the limitations on the power of that office. the us appeals court in san francisco has not gone as far as declaring this travel ban unconstitutional, but it did take issue with the us government's contention, that this ban was necessary in order to protect national security here, to protect the country from the threat of terrorism. the three justices the country from the threat of terrorism. the threejustices making the point in their 29 page unanimous

ruling that there was no evidence that anyone from any of those seven nations on this watchlist, if you like, had carried out a terrorist attack in the united states. the appeals court therefore refusing to lift the temporary restraining order that was put in place by the districtjudge in seattle last week. that means refugees from around the world and citizens from the seven nations who i mentioned in that executive order can continue to come to the us, until this matter is settled once and for all by the courts. —— who were mentioned. and quite possibly by the highest court in the land, the us supreme court. where might donald trump take this next? are his next steps? it does look, as i mentioned, like this could go all the way to the us supreme court. he dismissed this

decision by the appeals court in seattle today, describing it as political and he said, see you in court, on twitter, stressing that he is confident that his administration will prevail in this case. meanwhile, the attorney general of washington, bob ferguson, washington is one of the two states that all this case against the us government in seattle, he called on the president to withdraw this executive order and vowed to continue to hold donald trump accountable to the us constitution. but this, make no mistake, is a considerable setback for the trump administration, bearing in mind that immigration and protecting the country against the threat of what donald trump called radical islamic terrorism were both centrepieces of his run for the office of president of the united states. we will have to leave it

there. let's bring in the senior adviser at georgetown university, a global education institute in washington. he used to be a member of president george w. bush's senior staff. as for joining george w. bush's senior staff. as forjoining us. what do you make about the way donald trump has handled this? particularly the kind of advertorial approach towards the judiciary? i think the president is right on merits, he has because additional authority to absolutely within the best interests of our national security under the costa jewish and act. the court is mentioned the evidence. —— the constitutional act. this is where i disagree as a lawyer. they can't give the evidence that the president has because they aren't cleared to see the kind of classified information that the president has. could it have been handled better in the rollout of the executive order? there's no doubt. could it have been communicated that at the public by

the authorities who are charged with carrying out the work. but the president isn't wrong on his merits and actions as president. it does seem that it has become this battle between the executive arm and the judiciary. possibly some people might say it didn't need to have happened this way. donald trump st bees is political, but there was one republican drudge wasn't there? —— decision is political. there was. there has been a battle between the c0— there has been a battle between the co— equal branches of government since the birth of our republic. the judiciary, the legislative body have co nsta ntly judiciary, the legislative body have constantly been a cheque to each other. but this court decision doesn't mean the president were —— was wrong. i have a suggestion for the president. withdraw the executive order, take it out of the courts tonight. and issue a new executive order in the next day or so executive order in the next day or so andi executive order in the next day or

so and i think that's going to accomplish a lot in making sure that america continues to be safe under the direction of the president. how might that work? all the president would have if? 73 the might that work? all the president would have lib-g order, j the might that work? all the president would have lib-g order, therefore previous executive order, therefore rendering all lawsuits on that executive order moot. then he would order his eternal general to issue a new executive order. —— attorney general. then if someone wanted to challenge that they would have to start the process again. but i think this new executive order could be crafted in such a way, based on information the president now has within the courts, to make it pass the master where no one would dare challenge it. really interesting to speak to you. thank you. let's hear from a director of the centre politic at the university of virginia. you spend a lot of your time predicting and forecasting results politically. did you see this result coming? i think almost

eve ryo ne this result coming? i think almost everyone did. no one is surprised that the special 3—judge panel decided essentially to uphold the washington federal courtjudge. remember, this isn't as political as some are trying to make it out to be. the washington state judge or federaljudge was an appointee of republican president george w bush and one of q judges republican president george w bush and one ofgjudges that heard i what iwhat he what he would iwhat he would have iwhat he wn toi have iwhat he wntoi his; iwhat he wn toi h is cancel advised donald trump to do is cancel this executive order, draft another ta ps taps without some of the one, taps without some of the content is... or the issues it has been fought on, and there you go. well, i heard him say that, it is possible that could be done if the new executive order is much, much more narrowly tailored than a very

broad one that president trump released that has been turned out today. make no mistake, this was a very serious and sharp rebuke . the zzzfiaw it zzzfiawr it is zzzfiaflr it is almost new president. it is almost unprecedented or, or is unprecedented or, or is unprecedented in american history. so it is possible that could be done, but president trump would have to firstly admit he was wrong. he would almost never do that. i can't think ofan would almost never do that. i can't think of an example where he has admitted he was wrong. second, if he issued a new executive order my bet would be it would also be overly broad and that would invite the same kind of rebuke from the judicial system. was the court overreaching? i don't think the court was overreaching at all. given the information they had. remember, they haven't yet ruled on the merits of the case and that maybe the job the supreme court, although it is also possible that supreme court, absent onjustice, will rule

possible that supreme court, absent on justice, will rule four to four. if that case happens then of course the court's decision will be the law of the land, meaning other at kelly courts haven't ruled in the interim. there are approximately 20 suits pending in addition to the one decided today. that number will increase all as a result of this overly broad order. this case wasn't about the constitutionality, per se, it was about whether or not the suspension should be lifted or not. where might we see the battle over whether this was within the confines of the constitution or not play out? well, it has already begun. yes, technically this was about whether the decision of the washington state judge should be stayed or not, whether the travel ban would be reinstituted while this was argued.

but if you read the 29 page opinion of the appellate court, and your correspondent referred to that, it is online on virtually every news site, if you read that you will see that this court is already dealing with the constitutional issues and the very strong hints in this opinion suggest that what president trump did was unconstitutional. we will have to leave it there, but we really appreciate your time. stay with us on bbc news. still to come: the appeal court may have voted against the travel ban but we need people who support it. there is mr mandela, mr nelson mandela. a free man, taking his first steps into a new south africa. lannie gn:=‘i+~‘-:! !¢:a:- for the ousting of their former president, 'baby doc' duvalier.

because of his considerable value as a stallion, shergar was kept in a special secure box in the stud farm's central block. shergar was driven away in a horse box the thieves had brought with them. there stepped down from the plane figure in mourning. elizabeth ii, queen of this realm and of all her other realms and territories. head of the commonwealth, defender of the faith. this is bbc news. the headlines: a setback for donald trump. the us appeals court as upheld a lower court suspension of his travel ban on seven major —— mainly muslim countries. the win court. as a trump reacts defiantly, saying the

security of our nation is at stake. despite all the controversy, president trump is still popular in many parts of the united states. our correspondent went to montana to find out more. i believe that what we have seen with our president is phenomenal as a performance. this is a man who couldn't be happier he voted for donald trump. he is heavily involved in local politics and is a preacher. but his christian compassion doesn't extend to those he feels are threat to his way of life. there you go, kids, that will keep you warm. if they come among us, then try to enact something, say, sharia law... who is trying to do that? if groups of radical islamic people begin to show up who will eventually attempt to harm our women, those militant people need to understand that the women

of montana are armed. is anybody here angry? hollis says those who are protesting against donald trump's immigration policies do not represent the real america. this is a local rally in support of the refugees. not a bad turnout for a weekday lunchtime in the snow perhaps. but these are certainly not the loudest voices on this issue in montana right now. the state has one of the most high—profile anti—immigrant campaigns and, before the election, had one of the biggest anti—refugee the anger for many is directed mainly at muslims, something local politicians are tapping into — some would say even fuelling. after days of debate, the state senate has just passed a bill to say sharia law can't be applied in montana. this woman and her family arrived

here just a couple of months ago. they fled eritrea with no choice about where the un sent them. after more than four years of vetting, they landed in montana — nervous, shy about talking on camera, adjusting to a different world, and to this storm of anti—immigrant sentiment. what is striking in montana is all the focus on immigration is happening in an entire state the size of germany, with a publishing of just size of germany, with a publishing ofjusti million, where fewer than 20 refugee families have been settled since the mid— 905. but as far as many here and across america are concerned, there is simply no room for new immigrants, to whom the door should be firmly shut. all right, we bring you up to date

with some other stories. the japanese prime minister has arrived in the united states for a meeting with donald trump. it is thought that shinzo abe will announce £55? ihnflfi is; gitéfiiéffihéieé ' " "- us, the first asian shinzo abe is the first asian leader . . ,, . to the new shinzo abe is the first asian leader . . ,, . to - the new us +9. "3222‘s 9-5; —; w; %’;2:¥;%é a barrier +9. 9999 9.9 —; eec. aféziéga‘; a barrier is +9. 9999 .+!-.9 —9 !!c. 99999999 9 barrier is to be +9. 9999 999 —9 9919 999924999 9 barrier is to be put up permanent barrier is to be put up around the eiffel tower in paris by the end of the year. this is supposed to rejected from potential terror attacks. it will replace the metal fences put up during the euro 2016 football tournament. the romanian justice minister has resigned after a decree that will solve the law on some corruption offences. the government had already reversed that policy, but it has not come to protesters. there has been chaos in south africa's parliament

as presidentjacob chaos in south africa's parliament as president jacob zuma chaos in south africa's parliament as presidentjacob zuma try to get his annual state of the nation address. letters were thrown and opposition mps called the president a scoundrel, and rotten to the call, because of corruption allegations. andrew harding has the story. the gloom here in port elizabeth kentville relentless. —— the gloom here in port elizabeth can feel relentless. it's a rough city, worn down by corruption and neglect, and a revealing place tojudge south africa's future. the failures here are easy to spot. this place has become known as toilet valley. the neighbourhood was supposed to house thousands of poor families. somehow, the toilets got built, but no homes. they tell us we're going to get houses in three months' time. it's three years now! three years that you've had this beautiful toilet that doesn't work, and no house? no house. no wonder people are losing patience. as the poor struggle here, the powerful are looting with impunity. it's negligence from those who have

been entrusted to deal with the public purse. more than that, it's corruption. well, corruption, it boils down to corruption. you can't run away from it. it's the same story with these buses, which have sat unused in a depot since they were brought in for the 2010 world cup. the corruption here is quite breathtaking. this one bus scandal alone has cost the city more than £100 million, and that's just a fraction of what has been lost or stolen here. to many in south africa, the blame goes all the way to the top, with the example set by president jacob zuma, arriving, this evening, to address parliament in cape town. tighter security is becoming something of a habit here. inside, opposition mps interrupted the president's speech... an incorrigible man, rotten to the core! ..reminding him that he'd broken his oath of office in relation to a corruption scandal. in english, he's called a scoundrel!

eventually, political theatre turned into something more violent, security guards called in to reject the protesting mps. we would like to apologise... only then did mr zuma get his chance to celebrate his government's achievements. we are building a south africa that —— we are building a south africa that must be free from poverty, inequality and unemployment. but the political mood here is sour, and likely to get worse. but as gloomy as things may seem here, there's change in the air. here, in port elizabeth, and in other key cities, the opposition has been winning power in local elections, nudging south african democracy in the right direction. the result, a frenzy of initiatives in port elizabeth, the former opposition now keen to show it can fix the city and, who knows, maybe win

power nationwide in 2019. so if you get it right here, is this the way out of trouble for south africa? this is the only way out of trouble for south africa. that is why it is so critical for us to have achieved what we did in the last local government elections. we are steadfast that by 2019, we will put a coalition government together that will govern south africa where we bring all people together. perhaps, but in toilet valley, they are still waiting for homes. the economy remains stagnant. the challenges for any party are immense. andrew harding, bbc news, in port elizabeth. the web demonstrates that success more than kaziranga national park in assa m. more than kaziranga national park in assam. many local people, —— for

many local people, this is a devastating cost. kaziranga is an incredible story of conservation success. there are just a handful of indian rhinos here, a century ago, but now there are more than szut> "" world ' park its increasing controversy. last year, a :’ is to .. ‘iill ”i" i .. iii 3.5}: iii}? lir’l’: i am going to die. he hospital. i am going to die, he cries. translation: the guards were shutting rhinoceros. then the forest guards suddenly shot me. the park service it was a terrible accident, but a cash can barely walk. ——

akash. there was an outcry and local people protested at the mounting toll of death and injury in the park. we are on my patrol. there is a "rhyno" roy beggs was! yes, you can see it! the park has been given extraordinary powers to protect animals like him. the park says its ghaz were ordered to warn suspected poachers 99 i 9999391499 in 99 i 99999 in three 9 f— 99 i 93999999 in 1:7 three years 7 f 2'- well, the ark|is if 2'- well, the ark is if 2'- well, the ark is bein: i of control. well, the park is being run with utmost brutality. these are "extrajudicial executions". there is nojudge orjury or "extrajudicial executions". there is no judge orjury or questioning. people are being killed in these encounters. that is something the park vigorously denies. it says it follows the letter of the law, and

that a tough approach is necessary because of the scale of the poaching menace. of ‘i'-: 39 ‘f l" l‘) not ‘i'-: 39 ‘5 l" l‘) not only kaziranga's is not only kaziranga's anti—poaching policy that causes ‘s it which has