The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals did not make a verdict on President Trump's travel ban Tuesday, but Judge Michelle Friedland promised a verdict "as soon as possible."
The ruling will "probably" be issued this week, the court said in an earlier press release.
The hearing was conducted via phone calls due to how hastily it was set up. Here are the main takeaways.
The judges' big questions
Judges repeatedly asked August Flentje, the Justice Department's attorney, whether there was evidence that showed keeping the travel ban on hold would harm national security.
They also questioned his argument that states didn't have legal standing to sue and that the courts didn't have a major role to play in reviewing presidential decisions on national security.
LISTEN | Clifton told Washington state Attorney General Noah Purcell, "I haven't heard a lot of reference to evidence, and a lot more reference to allegations and I don't think allegations cut it at this stage."
Questions of religious intent
Judge Richard Clifton focused on the states' claim that the ban had religious motivations, saying that most Muslims weren't affected.
But Purcell said Trump's campaign promises about a Muslim ban showed there was intent to set up a ban that discriminated by religion. He argued that intent would make the ban unconstitutional, even if the ban itself didn't discriminate by religion.
It is extraordinary for the court to enjoin the president's national security determination based on some newspaper articles.
Flentje dismissed Purcell's argument, saying it was couched in media bias.
But Clifton retorted by asking, "Do you deny those statements were made?" Flentje conceded that they were, and Clifton said it was thus appropriate to consider Trump's campaign promises.
LISTEN | Flentje argued that Trump's ban was well within the bounds of presidential power.
What happens now?
As stated before, this case will likely be appealed and head to the Supreme Court regardless of the court's ruling.
Flentje suggested the travel ban could be narrowed in scope, focusing on people who didn't already have some connection to the U.S. But Purcell said the government hasn't shown the ability to apply a ban that specifically.
If the U.S. does not win this case as it so obviously should, we can never have the security and safety to which we are entitled. Politics!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 8, 2017
Trump said the Justice Department's victory should be "obvious."
The Associated Press contributed to this report.