Today, the federal appeals court will hear arguments on whether or not the president's executive immigration order — which targeted people and refugees from seven Muslim-majority countries and caused nationwide uproar — will be restored after a federal judge blocked it last week.

On Friday, Judge James Robart from Seattle ruled in favor of Washington state and Minnesota, which filed lawsuits against President Trump's immigration order, saying it had “no national security purpose,” according to the Washington Post.

In his ruling, which put the president's immigration ban on hold across the country, Robart wrote, "The states have met their burden of demonstrating that they face immediate and irreparable injury as a result of the signing and implementation of the executive order," according to NBC News.

The Independent reports that in immediate response to the ruling, U.S. Customs and Border Protection got on the phone with several American airlines, telling them to allow previously barred passengers onto U.S.-bound flights.

The hold on the president's immigration ban meant travelers, visa holders and refugees from Iraq, Iran, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Libya and Yemen could now enter the United States.

NBC News reports that in response, the White House press secretary called the ruling "outrageous" but later retracted that word and said, "The president's order is intended to protect the homeland and he has the constitutional authority and responsibility to protect the American people." 

The Washington Post reports that Justice Department lawyers called the immigration order "a lawful exercise of the President’s authority over the entry of aliens into the United States and the admission of refugees," and CBS reports the White House said it would file a stay on the immigration ban.

Monday, the states of Washington and Minnesota argued in a filing of their own that reinstating the ban would “unleash chaos again” by “separating families, stranding our university students and faculty, and barring travel,” according to the Washington Post.

And today, Washington, Minnesota and the Justice Department will be given 30 minutes to make their case to the federal appeals court on whether the ban should be reinstated or not, according to the Washington Post. When a ruling will be made, though, is still unclear.

The Post goes on to report that if either side is unsatisfied with the ruling, they can take it all the way to the Supreme Court. But with the Supreme Court down one judge and tied ideologically at 4-4, a straight split in a decision would mean the appeals court decision stays.