U.S. President Donald Trump's revised travel ban drew many criticisms not only from the citizens but also from the judges. Lately, a group of federal judges questioned the constitutionality of the president's revised travel ban.

It was just reported that some judges interrogated a government lawyer last Monday regarding Trump's so-called, "Muslim ban." As reported, this was just the start in which the travel ban was out to appellate test before the panel of federal judges. It can be recalled that this travel ban is a revised executive order of the president restricting travel from known six Muslim countries.

According to the New York Times, after the end of the appellate test, the federal judges ended up divided into two groups. The first group contended that the ban is a sort of discrimination and this is a complete violation of the First Amendment of their constitution.

Meanwhile, the other group of federal judges argued that judges have no right to second-guess and assess the president's measure on the country's national security. Once the president released the order, it is the duty of the judges to uphold such order.

Apart from those federal judges, this travel ban has been a subject of controversy and massive protests across the U.S. Most of the Americans thought that this is a product of religious hostility that's why this should not be implemented. Due to this issue, President Donald Trump also received backlash in his administration.

Moreover, the judges who are supporting the said travel ban said that judge should not dismiss the fact that Donald Trump is still the head of the country and that they should never ignore his motives of the country. Reuters reported that another judge claimed that statements of Trump should not be evaluated based on his previous speeches and statements.

Because of this, the court was advised by some that it should assess the revised order not based on previous statements since most of Trump's statements were delivered and made when he was still campaigning for the presidency. Lastly, Donald Trump's supported claimed that this has nothing to do with religion as it concerns national security.