According to Reuters, challengers to the ban had said in court papers that it should have expired on Wednesday, 90 days after the executive order was due to take effect on March 16. "The judges concluded that the president had failed to make a case that the order was actually necessary to protect national security, saying that was no "'talismanic incantation' that, once invoked, can support any and all exercise of executive power".
An entry on the Supreme Court docket said that the administration can file its new brief on Thursday.
It may be recalled, on May 25, a federal appeals court in Richmond, Virginia, refused to lift a nationwide injunction that halted a key provision of President Donald Trump's revised travel ban on six Muslim nations. By setting a new date for the ban's implementation, the administration may be able to argue that it has not expired. It was struck down by a judge in Washington state, and that decision was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.
This story has not been edited by Firstpost staff and is generated by auto-feed.
The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to allow the ban to take effect immediately. But a party aggrieved by an adverse class certification decision also need not satisfy the strict standards for taking an interlocutory appeal; instead, under Rule 23 (f), a "court of appeal  may permit an appeal from an order granting or denying class-action certification. if a petition for permission to appeal is filed with the circuit clerk within 14 days after the order is entered".
Today's unanimous ruling noted, "The President's authority is subject to certain statutory and constitutional restraints", but that Trump's revised executive order "exceeded the scope of the authority delegated to him by Congress".
Trump's tweets have increasingly been cited in court's decision process. "We welcome this ruling and believe it and the previous rulings in different courts outline a clear path that the Supreme Court should follow".
The Supreme Court's new briefing schedule for the combined cases lets the government submit its final brief on June 21. But the case also underlies a disturbing truth: Even if opponents succeed in stopping President Donald Trump from implementing this particular version of the Muslim ban, the fight over the issue is far from over.
Indeed, the President recently confirmed his assessment that it is the "countries" that are inherently risky, rather than the 180 million individual nationals of those countries who are barred from entry under the President's "travel ban".