>> this is cnn breaking news. >> and a warm welcome to our viewers in the united states and around the world. i'm michael holmes. >> and i'm lynda kinkade. 1:00 a.m. on the east coast, 6:00 a.m. in london. thanks for being with us. we start this hour with breaking news in the u.s. the u.s. justice department has just filed an appeal to reverse a u.s. district court judge's suspension of president donald trump travel ban. that's been filed with the ninth circuit court of appeals. >> the three judges who might hear that case were appointed separately by jimmy carter, george w. bush, and barack obama. cnn u.s. justice reporter laura jarrett is on the phone with us from washington. laura, you've been going through this. tell us the main points of it.

>> well, lynda and makel, thichs is a strongly worded legal filing. just after midnight on the east coast, the u.s. justice department moved for what's called an emergency stay of the sweeping decision out of seattle, that temporarily halted the enforcement of president trump's travel ban on a nationwide basis. and in this legal filing, the justice department said that blocking the travel ban, quote, harms the public and second-guesses the president's national security judgment. the thrust of the argument here being made by the justice department are two different prongs. the first one is that the plaintiffs in the case, the case was brought by the washington state attorney general and minnesota, they're saying the plaintiffs don't have standing to sue here. they haven't been harmed in a way that allows you to get into court. the second argument is that the

president's authority in this area is sweeping and quite broad. and so he can basically do what he wants in this area of immigration in an unreviewable way. the court doesn't have authority to review him. so it's a pretty strongly worded legal filing we're seeing right now from the justice department. >> and the justice department is, of course, calling for it to be immediate. how quickly could it happen? >> well, it's hard to say. it was just filed less than an hour ago. it's unclear yet whether the other side, washington, you know, state, will have an opportunity to respond. there's a motions panel set up in the ninth circuit court of appeals that can hear these types of cases by phone. and so they may do it very quickly. as early as tomorrow. >> the other wording, as we go through this, it does talk about the president's national security judgment,

second-guesses the president's national security judgment, but also says that the ban contravenes the constitutional separation of powers. what does it mean by that? > >> the idea there is that congress gave the president the ability to do this. and by a different branch of government, in this case, the judiciary branch, intervening in that authority, they're saying is improper. they're saying the president is able to do this, because congress let him do it. >> it certainly is fascinating outcome. we will see whether there's a decision tomorrow. laura jarrett, great to have you with us, thanks so much. >> it's only just getting under way, this fight one way or the other, and it could end up in the supreme court as we've been hearing. troy slaton, legal analyst, criminal defense attorney general. i'm guessing you've had a quick read of part of the language

here or heard laura there. wh what's your take on this? >> well, i'm a little bit surprised that it took the united states justice department this long to file this appeal. they should have had this ready to go a while ago, and that leads me to believe that there was some sort of disagreement within the justice department as to what was going to be their basis for asking for a stay of this temporary restraining order. >> what other options did they have? >> what option downing stres di department have? well, nothing, really, the president was saying, you need to do this and the justice department -- well, as far as they had several options as far as what their legal argument was going to be. i don't think they really had a choice as to whether or not they were going to file for this stay of the temporary restraining order. >> so what you're saying is, you get the sense that they weren't

really ready with an argument early enough. what do you make of the argument they're saying, that the district court ruling, barring enforcement, then contravenes the constitutional separation of power, harms the public by thwarting enforcement of an executive order issued by the nation's representative. is that a good argument? >> it is. i think the two arguments that they made are really good, and they're really the most common argument you would make sort of in a situation like this. the first argument being whether or not the plaintiffs, being the state of washington, even had standing to bring this, this type of lawsuit. and standing for all the folks at home is really a threshold issue. it's whether you have a right to go to the courthouse steps, to make this argument. so the justice department is saying that they're not even a proper party because they're not the individuals. they're not the entity that would be harmed by this.

and the other argument is also a very strong one. it's true, the president of the united states has plenary power in this area. the united states congress, under the constitution, has the right, has the authority, to regulate immigration. and they passed laws, giving the president of the united states, the authority to implement those laws, with regard to the customs and border protection, the cbp. and it's interesting that the department of homeland security, very quickly reacted when the court in the ninth circuit, judge robeart issued this temporary restraining order, the department of homeland security said immediately, we're going to obey that, and now, this just causes so much confusion into the entire system p but i think that the ninth circuit court of appeals is going to act very quickly to either implement a

stay or sustain the restraining order. >> so now three judges from the ninth circuit will look at this argument. what considerations do they need to make? >> they need to decide whether or not the plaintiffs here, the state of washington, has a reasonable likelihood of success, and whether or not they would be ir rep rably harmed if this temporary restraining order stayed in place. and i think that, looking at the precedent for the ninth circuit, some people in the legal community call it the ninth circus, it's a very liberal circuit. it's the most over-turned by the united states supreme court, and two of the three judges were appointed by democratic presidents. as you mentioned, jimmy carter and barack obama appointed two out of the three.

the other by president george bush -- w. bush. >> one imagines the confusion would continue all the way to the supreme court. would it be a situation that the ban is implemented. the court gets its pause, so everybody can come again. if the ninth circuit upholds the government's side of things, the ban goes back on, and everyone has to stop again. and then there's another appeal and it works its way up the supreme court. people got to know whether they should get on a plane or not, is that fair? >> well, of course it's not fair to those wanting to travel. >> i mean, is that a fair statement of what is likely to happen, it's on, it's off, it's on, it's off? >> absolutely. because this is a matter of such importance, the ninth circuit is going to act on this quickly. they know that the world is watching. so i many that we could get a decision possibly today, super bowl sunday, and the ninth

circuit has procedures for dealing with emergency appeals like this. and they could come up with their decision any moment and if whatever party doesn't like it, is likely to appeal it to the supreme court, and the supreme court could take it up rather quickly. and it could end up in a 4-4 tie. >> that's going to be a bit of a mess. >> so in that case, if it's a 4-4 tie, the lower court decision stands. >> right. so the seattle ruling at present would stand? >> no, whatever the ninth circuit court of appeals decision is would stand. >> wow. >> troy, thanks so much. of course we have to assume that the justices won't be watching the super bowl and will be focused on this. >> hopefully. >> troy slaton in los angeles, thanks so much. >> thank you. well, president trump's travel ban has sparked nationwide protests, almost before the ink was dry on his

executive order, those demonstrations include outside the florida resort where mr. trump is spending the weekend. >> cnn's jessica sh snyder is in palm beach and has the latest for us there. >> out here at mar-a-lago, a day of legal wranglings, twitter tire ready by president trump and protesters out here. at one point, several hundred people making their march as close as they could get to mar-a-lago. a mostly peaceful protest similar to the last few weeks, these people wanting to get their message directly to the president or as close as they could get at what they're calling the winter white house. as far as president trump goes, he took to twitter, sticking to his executive order, that it was lawful, was constitutional, and even slamming the federal judge out in seattle several times. in fact, donald trump taking to twitter, i'll read you a few of

his posts, saying, the judge opens up our country to potential terrorists and others that do not have our best interest at heart. bad people are very happy. and earlier in the day, president trump tweeting out this, the opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned. jessica schneider, cnn, palm beach, florida. >> those tweets that jessica mentioned there were ridiculed by washington's governor as beneath the dignity of the presidency. earlier before the appeal was filed by the u.s. justice department, governor jay insly, spoke about the importance of the legal challenge his state brought against the president's executive order. >> the president can tweet until the cows come home, but the fact of the matter is, he is bound by this order. it is a legally binding order, and he's going to have to follow it. that's the way our system of checks and balances work.

and he asked this question about lawyers. his lawyers are telling him the facts, that this is the way america works. because in america, when an executive does something that's unconstitutional, thank goodness we have a federal judicial system that can rein that in, and that's what this judge did. and by the way, this judge -- this insult of him, this was a judge appointed by conservative republican george w. bush. he was confirmed with a 99-0 vote in the senate. this is the way democracy is meant to work. >> well, that travel ban has set up a wave of protests right across the world, even near mr. trump's front door. >> they've been marching not far from his mar-a-lago resort where he's spending the weekend. supporters of the president and the travel ban also spotted in the crowds. and in washington, hundreds walked from the white house to the u.s. capitol on saturday, with a banner saying, "no ban,

no wall." >> protesters also gathered in front of the eiffel tower in paris. an american there speaking out because she says this is not what her country stands for. >> being an american, i care about my country and i care about how we're portrayed and seen from other countries and i think that we need to be careful of what we're doi right now. we have french organizers on our team who have been a huge help, and it's been amazing. if you see the crowd, people are keep coming. i think people are ready to fight back and to organize. we're not mourning anymore. we're organizing. >> well, after the break, new protests against president trump's travel ban. >> more on how the trump administration is defending that ban just ahead. also, tensions rising between the u.s. and iran. >> next, how iran is responding to new u.s. sanctions. technology... ing ...doesn't go on your wrist. ♪

the highly advanced audi a4, with class-leading horsepower. my insurance rates are but dad, you've got... ...allstate. with accident forgiveness they guarantee your rates won't go up just because of an accident. smart kid. indeed. it's good to be in, good hands. "how to win at business." step one: suck on and point decisively with the arm of your glasses. it is no longer eyewear, it is your wand of business wizardry. abracadabra. you've just gone from invisible to invincible. step two: before your meeting, choose la quinta. the only hotel where you can redeem loyalty points for a free night-instantly so you can prepare to win at business. book now at lq.com how to brush his teeth. (woman vo) in march, my husband

didn't recognize our grandson. (woman 2 vo) that's when moderate alzheimer's made me a caregiver. (avo) if their alzheimer's is getting worse, ask about once-a-day namzaric. namzaric is approved for moderate to severe alzheimer's disease in patients who are taking donepezil. it may improve cognition and overall function, and may slow the worsening of symptoms for a while. namzaric does not change the underlying disease progression. don't take if allergic to memantine, donepezil, piperidine, or any of the ingredients in namzaric. tell the doctor about any conditions; including heart, lung, bladder, kidney or liver problems, seizures, stomach ulcers, or procedures with anesthesia. serious side effects may occur, including muscle problems if given anesthesia; slow heartbeat, fainting, more stomach acid which may lead to ulcers and bleeding; nausea, vomiting, difficulty urinating, seizures, and worsening of lung problems. most common side effects are headache, diarrhea, dizziness, loss of appetite, and bruising. (woman 2 vo) i don't know what tomorrow will bring but i'm doing what i can. (avo) ask about namzaric today. that the essence of integrity is a promise kept.

♪ if you've got the time welcome to the high life. ♪ we've got the beer ♪ miller beer adios, honey, hasta la vista, baby. (sing-songy) fat guy in a little coat. that rug really tied the room together. any questions? bueller? bueller? that's the unlimited effect. stream your entertainment and more with unlimited data when you switch to at&t wireless and have directv. plus, get the amazing new iphone 7 on us.

make sure it's ano make a intelligent one. ♪ the highly advanced audi a4, with available virtual cockpit. welcome back, we're live with breaking news on u.s. president donald trump's travel ban. >> the u.s. justice department just now filing an appeal to stop a district judge's decision that froze mr. trump's immigration order. now this coming as protests, you see them there, continuing in cities right across the country against the president's policies. >> about a thousand demonstrators turned out in west palm beach, florida, near where

mr. trump is spending the weekend at his mar-a-lago resort. there are also a handful of trump demonstrators demonstrating there as well. >> in a handful of tweets, he blasted the judge who suspended the ban and at a ball in palm beach, he predicted his administration will win the battle. >> well, president trump tells fox news in a brand-new interview, that he respects russian president vladimir putin. he went much further than that, acknowledging that president putin may be a killer, but added that we've got a lot of killers. >> do you respect putin? >> i do respect him. >> why? >> well, i respect a lot of people, but that doesn't mean i respect a lot -- i'm going to g along with him. i say it's better to get along with russia than not. will i get along with him? i don't know. >> putin's a killer. >> we've got a lot of killers.

you think our country is so innocent? >> claire sebastian joins us from moscow. i don't know how that's going down at the kremlin, but certainly a curious equivalency being suggested there by donald trump. >> yeah, michael, that's the most striking thing about this, the rhetoric that we hear from trump in those comments is very similar to the kind of rhetoric that we hear from both the kremlin here and from the russian media. the moral quiflencey. we've heard it from president putin in the past. for example, in a speech he made in 2014, he compared russian actions in crimea to what the u.s. in the west did in kosovo. this is how russia in the past has tried to expose what they see as u.s. and western hypocrisy in their attitude to russia. but beyond the shock factor of these comments, it's interesting to try to decipher what this will mean from a policy standpoint. this came just a few hours after

president trump spoke to the man who is essentially putin's arch enemy, president poroshenko of ukraine. trump described it as a good call. he said the u.s. plans to work with russia, ukraine and all parties trying to resolve the ukrainian conflict, which has been escalating in recent days. difficult to imagine how the u.s. will form a coalition with russia against isis in syria, while at the same time, aiding or helping ukraine in its battl against russian-backed rebels in the east of that country. certainly there are members of mr. trump's party, john mccain, in particular, who have called for the u.s. to provide lethal aid even to ukraine in the conflict in the east of that country. so there's a tension already between these two key issues, ukraine and syria, which will potentially prove crucial in the development of the u.s.-russia relationship. >> and just speaking about that

relationship, we've seen a lot of back and forth from the trump administration. president trump praising president putin several times. then we had his u.n. ambassador this week condemning russia, and now these latest comments from president trump. what should we make of where things stand now between the u.s. and russia? >> i think there's a lot of questions to be asked. we look forward in the coming weeks and months to meetings in person between russia's president vladimir putin and u.s. president donald trump. we know according to the kremlin, that could happen before the g20 summit over the summer. president poroshenko of ukraine, as was talked about on the call, said he plans to travel to washington soon to meet with mr. trump. so more will come out in the coming weeks and months. but certainly it's been a week of very mixed messages. the call between president putin

and president president trump last weekend didn't mention the word sanctions at all, but later in the week, we heard from the u.n. ambassador nikki haley who said sanctions should not be lifted on russia until crimea is returned to ukraine. so this has been playing out in very polarized terms. the kremlin playing its cards very close to its chest. telling us, they never indulged in any optimism that the relationship would improve dramatically with the u.s., but we continue to see how this unfolds and certainly a lot of clarity is still needed. >> exactly. nikki haley's comments at the u.n. must have been heartening for mr. poroshenko. mr. poroshenko obviously trying to look for some u.s. support. >> absolutely, michael. quite a stark difference between the two statements we got on that call. one from the white house and one from the office of president poroshenko. the white house keeping it really very broad, broad enough,

in fact, to be almost confusing. of course mr. trump calling it a very good call, but saying that the u.s. will work to resolve the conflict along the border. this of course is not specifically a border conflict, more of a territorial conflict in the east of ukraine. the ukrainian side being much more specific, saying that they are working to kind of resolve the tensions around the government-held town where we've seen violence flare in recent days and weeks. referring perhaps to those comments from nikki haley earlier in the week who talked about not lifting sanctions against russia until crimea was returned to ukraine. so you're right, definitely, ukraine is trying to draw as many positives as it can from that call, but the white house leaving things very open to interpretation. >> yeah. they certainly are. claire sebastian, good to have you with us, thank you.

well, a new u.s. defense secretary has some harsh words for iran, calling it the world's biggest state sponsor of terrorism. >> yeah, this comes a day after the u.s. placed fresh sanctions on iran, which carried out a missile deft just last week, and just days after the trump administration says it's placing iran on notice. our nic robertson has more. >> reporter: with attention on this, the rhetoric and the actions with iran really seem to be ratcheting up. the u.s. secretary of defense james mattis saying iran is the world's biggest sponsor of terrorism. a very strong statement. you have, within hours after that, the commander of the aerospace part of the islamic revolutionary guard corps, the elite force in iran saying if the enemy makes a mistake, our roaring missiles will come raining down on their heads. but at the same time, over the

weekend, iran has begun military drills, by again that aerospace secked of the elite force, testing missile system,s, testing radar systems, a very clear message there is, if there's any kind of military action, aircraft flying into iran's airspace, if there is any kind of military action like that, iran is ready for it. that's the message and we know that president trump, his secretary, his spokesman, sean spicer, have both been very clear. the united states is not taking anything off the table in their potential actions against iran. so at the moment, the tensions, the rhetoric, the actions just keep escalating. nic robertson, cnn, malta. and a short break. when we come back, some people affected by the travel ban can now fly to the u.s., but not many of them are rushing to the airport just yet.

don't just eat. ♪ mangia! bertolli. so beautiful. what shall we call you? tom! name it tom! studies show that toms have the highest average earning potential over their professional lifetime. see? uh, it's a girl. congratulations! two of my girls are toms. i work for ally, finances are my thing. you know, i'm gonna go give birth real quick and then we'll talk, ok? nice baby.

let's go. here comes tom #5! nothing, stops us from doing right by our customers. ally. do it right. whoo! look out. ally. do it right. but when we brought our daughter home, that was it. now i have nicoderm cq. the nicoderm cq patch with unique extended release technology helps prevent your urge to smoke all day. it's the best thing that ever happened to me. every great why needs a great how.

[ alarm weather.eping ] ♪

[ laughter ] cartoons. wait for it. [ cat screech ] [ laughter ] ♪ [ screaming ] [ laughter ] make everyday awesome with the power of xfinity x1... hi grandma! and the fastest internet. [ girl screaming ] [ laughter ] >> this is cnn breaking news. >> hello, everyone, i'm michael holmes. >> and miami lynda kinkade. this is cnn newsroom, live from atlanta. we are continuing to follow the breaking news out of the u.s. of the legal battle brewing over president donald trump's travel ban. >> the u.s. justice department is appealing a federal judge's

decision suspending that order. that news coming as protests against mr. trump broke out in several cities again, this one near palm beach florida on saturday where the president attended an event at his mar-a-lago estate. he told reporters his administration would win its case. >> alan dershowitz is a professor at harvard law school, joining us via skype in miami, florida. how do you think this case will be argued, this appeal? and how likely is success for the trump administration? >> well, there are 29 judges on the ninth circuit, three of them get selected to hear a case. so we're playing judicial rule oat. the court has some of the most liberal and some of the most conservative judges, it depends on who's drawn in the wheel. the argument the government will

make is that these states don't have standing to object to the president's executive order, that the president's executive order is constitutional and the president is authorized to make the kinds of judgment he made and it's impossible to predict what the outcome will be. my own judgment is that part of the president's executive order is constitutional. part of it is unconstitutional. what's required is a calibrated nuance the approach to it. so far, none of the courts have given it that kind of approach. the court in washington said the statute, or the regulation is unconstitutional. and we're not clear what the end result is going to be. no one can predict its outcome. >> and now donald trump has attacked the judge who made this decision, he took to twitter, and the president wrote the judge opens up our country to terrorists. what did you make of this sort of attack from the commander in chief of the judicial system? >> well, first of all, anybody's

free to criticize judges. i've criticized judges. i whot a whole book criticizing the supreme court for bush v. gore. president trump used words that seem very injudicious, very likely to alienate some of the appella appellate judges who might sit on this, but these judges will decide the case on their merits, and it's a closely divided case that reasonable people can disagree about. i think in the end, the stay will be at least partly lifted. because parts of the executive order are constitutional. i'll give you an example. if you have a family of people in yemen who have never been to the united states, have no connection, and th -- they have no connection, they want a visa and they're turned down, they have no standing, no right to challenge that. on the other hand, if you have

somebody in the country, attending university, and their visa was challenged, they would have the right to challenge that. so it's partly constitutional, partly unconstitutional, and the courts have to give it careful, thoughtful consideration. >> i'm curious. so there's this appeal to that judge's decision. how does it work? can there be another appeal to whatever decision comes out of the ninth circuit? could it end up at the supreme court where you could end up with a 4-4 tie? >> it's very likely to end up in the supreme court, very possible it will be a 4-4 tie. that's what happened last time when president obama's immigration order was challenged. it turned out to be 4-4, that means that the lower court decision is affirmed. here we have a complexity, because you have a judge in massachusetts who ruled in favor of trump, and that might be appealed by the plaintiffs, and the cases may come to the supreme court at the same time. and what happens if you have two 4-4 decisions, one of which affirms upholding the regulation

and one which of affirms striking it down. this is a mess. the president can withdraw the executive order, and can go back to the drawing board and tries to draft it again, this time with the help of experts, and i think we could get a decent executive order that protects us against terrorism but doesn't raise the kind of constitutional issues this order does raise. >> u.s. presidents do have broader and sweeping power. is it rare for a district judge to make this sort of a ruling a nationwide ruling on an executive action? >> well, it's rare, but it's not unprecedented. it happened exactly that way when a texas federal court struck down president obama's broad executive order, regulating what happens to people who are in the country illegally and having committed crimes. we had similar decisions going to health care. so it's not routine, but it has

happened from time to time over our history. what's odd is for a stay to be granted so quickly, based on so superficial an opinion. the judge's opinion in this case from washington is extremely superficial. it doesn't really go into the merits of the constitutional issues very well. he made a statement from the bench, saying that this doesn't protect us at all. that's not the job of the judge, the judge isn't an expert in national security. the national security advisers are. so i think we're seeing overbroad generalizations, both from the president and from the judge. this is not the finest hour of american legal history from any point of view. >> and when you look at it, you've been doing this for decades, are you concerned about the speed with which a lot of these orders are coming out? that perhaps time has not been

given, due consideration has not been given, and we're just going to end up in this legal minefield over a whole variety of issues? >> i completely agree. this was done too hastily. it was done without consultation. it was done to satisfy a campaign promise, rather than to protect the nation in a reasonable way. it could have been done more carefully, and it still can be done more carefully. and one hopes that perhaps the president will be advised and maybe will have second thoughts and decide to go back to the drawing board. we do need protection against terrorism, and there is the possibility of terrorists coming through our visa programs, but we can deal with that program without confronting problems under the equal protection clause, the first amendment, relating to religion, and statutes. there's a statute on the books that says visa shall not be denied based on religion. so this can be done much more

carefully. right now it's a lose-lose. we're not getting protection against terrorism. the airports are a mess. nobody knows what the outcome is going to be president courts are divided. the president acted too hastily. this is not a good thing for americans or for peace or for the protection against terrorism, also the constitution. >> a lot of problems there, alan dershowitz. great to have your perspective on all of that, thanks so much for joining us. >> thank you. well, visa holders in the seven affected countries woke up to the news that they could go to the u.s. now, but they warn that changes could come again. >> yeah, we're joined from istanbul in turkey with reaction there. what are you seeing? >> well, lynda, i think there's still a lot of confusion and uncertainty. very similar to what we saw and what we reported last week, when the travel ban went into effect

after the executive order. it took some time for the news to really spread. it took time for the airlines to receive this updated travel restriction. and then we saw that yesterday, it took several hours throughout the day. we were reaching out to airlines around the world, asking them if they received the updates, and you know, slowly but surely, they did receive those updates by end of the day on saturday, but we didn't see any sort of real rush, sort of exodus, people trying to get on planes just yet. i think there's -- because of this uncertainty, people are a bit weary. they don't want to take this risk of getting on these planes and going to the united states because they know that this is a legal battle that is still ongoing and they really don't know what the outcome of it is going to be. because when people get these visas, after waiting to get their visas for a long time, they do risk having these visas

canceled, for example, if they get to the united states. and it is a costly trip for a lot of people. so there's that financial side to it, and people don't want to risk that, and also the issue of humiliation. you know, people did talk about looking at people getting detained at airports, people being pulled off planes, or turned back. and described it as quite a humiliating experience which people want to try to avoid. so there is, to an extent, a bit of cautious optimism here that things might be changing, but surely people are feeling very uncertain about what's going to come next. so i think it's a bit of a wait and see situation right now, lynda. >> i guess there's a sense by many there, of collective punishment being imposed on all of them, the suspicion, particularly iraqis, many of whom have been working with the u.s. in the war on terror. but among the people you've been in contact with, are there those who have an understanding, yeah,

well, we understand what the u.s. is trying to do? >> you know what, michael, i think a lot of people understand that the united states needs to protect itself, but -- and they know that there needs to be vetting to get to countries like the united states because of this changing threat in the world right now. but at the same time, what they don't understand is what extreme vetting means. because people would tell you, they have already gone through so many layers of screening, of background checks, of interviews, all sorts of vetting before they even got visas. especially when it comes to refugees. so, i think that's where the confusion is. they do understand that the u.s. needs to have its own measures in place, but they don't understand, you know, how this could change afterwards and why there would need to be extra vetting and how would that be? >> yeah, more from them, what they already go through.

germana, thanks so much. >> well, still to come, mr. trump is attacking the federal judge who suspended the travel ban. how vice president mike pence is defending his boss.

and back to our breaking news now out of the united states, of the legal battle continuing to brew over president donald trump's travel

ban. >> less than a couple of hours ago, the u.s. justice department vow filed to appeal a federal judge's decision suspending that order. on friday, president trump attacked the federal judge who put a hold on that ban. >> he tweeted, saying, the judge opens our country to potential terrorists and others that do not have our best interest at heart. bad people are very happy. for more on that appeal, here's our sara sidner in san francisco, california. >> reporter: there are three judges, a three-panel of judges, who will look at this, who will look through and say, do we need to agree with the department of justice on legal grounds, or is the judge's decision in washington, can that stand as this goes through the courts? the three judges are in three different places, one in hawaii, one of the judges resides in arizona, the other judge resides here in northern california. and so they will all confer

likely on e-mail or by phone, and decide what is the legally proper thing to do. at the same time, the department of justice can decide they want to go above the ninth circuit court, especially if they lose that case and go all the way to the supreme court. but first, i'm sure they would like to hear what the ninth circuit court has to say, likely that would take a couple of days to give that decision. we should also look at whether or not their appeal has a good chance to win in this particular court. we talked to a legal expert who is very familiar with how this court runs. he is a law professor at uc hastings. >> the trump administration would have to say, there's something about this stay that harms us ir rep rably and i'm not sure they have any showing on that, since the immigration authorities still have authority to keep out bad guys, whether this order is in place or not. you can always keep out bad guys. and then they would have to

say -- the trump administration would have to say on the merits, the judge was very clearly wrong. in other words, when he says there's a likelihood of success on the merits, you have to say there's no chance of success on the merits. so the standard to get this reversed is really very high and i think unlikely. >> if the ninth circuit court does not rule in favor of the department of justice, allowing it to put the travel ban back in place, then all of this will go back to the court in washington and go through that court and maybe we'll finally have a decision. how long that's going to take, we don't know yet. sara sidner, cnn, san francisco. >> u.s. vice president mike pence is standing by president trump's criticism of the federal judge who ruled against that travel ban. >> here's what he told abc news earlier on saturday. >> is it appropriate for the president to be questioning the legitimacy of a federal judge in that way? >> president trump's made it clear that our administration is going to put the safety and security of the american people first. and the executive order that he put into effect was legal, it

was appropriate and our administration is going to be using all legal means at our disposal to challenge the judge's order. >> i understand that. but is it right for the president to say "so-called judge," doesn't that undermine the separation of powers in the constitution written right next door? >> i don't think it does. i think the american people are accustomed to the president speaking his mind. >> that was a fascinating interview there. >> we are just hours away, by the way, from the kickoff to super bowl li. >> that's right. we'll hear from atlanta quarterback matt ryan, ahead of the big game. that's coming up after a short break. >> mvp, by the way. mvp announced today. deservedly. at business." step one: suck on and point decisively with the arm of your glasses. it is no longer eyewear, it is your wand of business wizardry. abracadabra. you've just gone from invisible to invincible.

step two: before your meeting, choose la quinta. the only hotel where you can redeem loyalty points for a free night-instantly so you can prepare to win at business. book now at lq.com remember when you said men are supeyeah...ivers? yeah, then how'd i get this... ...allstate safe driving bonus check? ...only allstate sends you a bonus check for every six months you're accident free. silence. it's good to be in, good hands.

it has long been called storm of tiny bubbles, the champagne of beers. ♪ if you've got the time welcome to the high life. ♪ we've got the beer ♪ miller beer how to brush his teeth. (woman vo) in march, my husband didn't recognize our grandson. (woman 2 vo) that's when moderate alzheimer's made me a caregiver. (avo) if their alzheimer's is getting worse, ask about once-a-day namzaric. namzaric is approved for

moderate to severe alzheimer's disease in patients who are taking donepezil. it may improve cognition and overall function, and may slow the worsening of symptoms for a while. namzaric does not change the underlying disease progression. don't take if allergic to memantine, donepezil, piperidine, or any of the ingredients in namzaric. tell the doctor about any conditions; including heart, lung, bladder, kidney or liver problems, seizures, stomach ulcers, or procedures with anesthesia. serious side effects may occur, including muscle problems if given anesthesia; slow heartbeat, fainting, more stomach acid which may lead to ulcers and bleeding; nausea, vomiting, difficulty urinating, seizures, and worsening of lung problems. most common side effects are headache, diarrhea, dizziness, loss of appetite, and bruising. (woman 2 vo) i don't know what tomorrow will bring but i'm doing what i can. (avo) ask about namzaric today.

well, the stage is set for the biggest game in american football. >> can't wait. we're talking about the new england patriots and atlanta falcons just hours away from super bowl li. it's happening in houston, texas, this year. it is the patriots' ninth super bowl appearance. that's a record.

but only the second for atlanta. >> if the patriots quarterback tom brady wins, he'll become the nfl quarterback with the most super bowl victories ever. his rival falcons quarterback matt ryan has just been named the league's mvp. >> and well deserved. cnn's coy wire used to play for the falcons. he caught up with matt ryan and has this look at the big game from houston. >> i am here in downtown houston with some of my newest friends, super bowl li. the game is not far away. this is going to be an incredible matchup between the atlanta falcon s and the new england patriots. the falcons looking to do something they haven't done in 22 years, win a sports championship for their city. the patriots on the other hand, tom brady is looking to win a fifth super bowl title as a quarterback. he's talked about this week how his family means a lot to him. they've had some health concerns

there. they are all here for this big game. but matt ryan on the other hand, matty ice, former teammate of mine, he looks different this year. his game is on point. a confidence level i hadn't seen before. so inside the mind of matt ryan. what the heck did you do this offseason? something you did to make yourself better? >> i think when you believe in what you're doing, it's amazing how that leads to self-peace or confidence going into games. the navy s.e.a.l.s talk about you don't rise to the occasion. you sink to the level of your preparation. when the situation comes you do exactly what you prepared yourself to do. >> if you could go back and tell this little guy about how he can prepare for that journey that's ahead of him, what would you say? >> i was playing for the whippets there playing fullback number 20, the 75-pounders. just enjoy it, man. it's been so much fun, and i've

been very fortunate. >> all right. the matchup is just nearby. tom brady versus matt ryan. going to be an incredible matchup. can't wait to see how it all plays out downtown houston, super bowl li, it's almost time and the fans are ready. >> it's going to be a great game. >> it is. it's going to be a tough game for the falcons, but fingers crossed. >> that's all we have time for right now. i'm lynda kinkade. >> i'm michael holmes. another hour of "newsroom" starts with robin ker now and cyril vanier. thanks for your company these past few hours. and now, i help people find discounts,

like paperless, multi-car, and safe driver, that help them save on their car insurance. any questions? -yeah. -how do you go to the bathroom? great. any insurance-related questions? -mm-hmm. -do you have a girlfriend? uh, i'm actually focusing on my career right now, saving people nearly $600 when they switch, so...

where's your belly button? [ sighs ] i've got to start booking better gigs.

this is cnn breaking news. >> hello, and a very warm welcome to our viewers in the u.s. and around the world. i'm cyril vanier. >> i'm robyn curnow. it's 2:00 a.m. on the u.s. east coast. 7:00 a.m. in london. we start with breaking news in the u.s. the justice department here has just filed its appeal to a u.s. district court judge's suspension of donald trump's travel ban. a legal victory would reinstate that ban, at least for now. >> the appeal has been filed with the ninth circuit court of appeals which will hear the case. another three judges were appointed separately by jimmy