So, to be clear: the ban that wasn't a ban until it was a ban was banned, and attempts to ban the ban of the ban have been disbanded.

he Supreme Court rarely takes cases where a lower court was simply incorrect. There usually must be some other reason for the Supreme Court to take the case, such as to correct a difference in opinion between the courts of appeals, to resolve a question that has confused or misled lower courts, or sometimes just because the case is too important to ignore. Within these boundaries, it is generally easier to convince the Supreme Court that it should take a case when the court of appeals got it wrong. That means that in general, we ought to expect the Supreme Court to reverse more often than it affirms. But as Court-watchers know, even with these qualifications, the Ninth Circuit has a reputation as a magnet for the high court's negative attention. Although recent years have seen other circuits competing with the Ninth Circuit for the title of "Most Reversed," the Ninth still appears to hold the unquestioned title. The Ninth Circuit's best showing in recent years was October Term 2009, with a 60 percent reversal rate in the 15 cases on which certiorari was granted. The Sixth Circuit got the prize for highest reversal rate that year, with seven cases resulting in seven reversals, while the Seven Circuit came in a close second (91 percent reversal rate in eleven cases).   But in 2010, perhaps seeking to reclaim its position at the top of the heap, the Ninth Circuit was reversed a startling 19 times (79 percent), three times as many reversals as most circuits had cases before the Supreme Court. The same pattern continued in the 2011 (71 percent) and 2012 terms (86 percent), when the Ninth Circuit was reversed more than twice as many times as most circuits had cases before the Court.

More up to date stats   http://tinyurl.com/glbfxdb

Possible legislation addressing the 9th

According to Fox News, Arizona Senators Jeff Flake and John McCain have introduced legislation that will take six states out of the court, and create a whole new 12th Circuit. According to Flake, the court is overburdened, bloated, and slow.

"It represents 20 percent of the population -- and 40 percent of the land mass is in that jurisdiction. It's just too big," Flake told Fox News on Wednesday. "We have a bedrock principle of swift justice and if you live in Arizona or anywhere in the 9th Circuit, you just don't have it."

But Dershowitz also states,

Just write a new Executive Order, clean up the language.

That is , if it is a pressing national security issue, thus challenging the Donalds ego. The Donald would normally prefer to prove the 9th Circuit wrong, but if this is a pressing security issue, he should just re write the order.

But it is Buzzfeed

BREAKING: 9th Circuit will be voting on whether to reconsider the 3-judge panel decision en banc.

By David French

by DAVID FRENCH    February 9, 2017 8:57 PM @DAVIDAFRENCH

After the Ninth Circuit's dangerous precedent, the Trump administration needs to slow down and consider its next move. It's often said that bad facts make bad law. In the case of the Ninth Circuit's just-issued ruling continuing the nationwide injunction against Donald Trump's executive order pausing immigration from seven jihadist or jihad-torn countries, it's necessary to amend that saying. Bad facts combined with superheated politics can make terrible law.