Jeff Chiu / AP
Several headlines about the oral arguments on the travel ban marked the panel's skepticism of the government's arguments:
The AP first wrote the headline: "Federal judges express skepticism about Trump travel ban," and later edited it to "Appeals court hammers on government arguments for travel ban"
The NYT: "Court Skeptical of Justice Dept. Arguments to Reinstate Ban"
The Washington Post first wrote the headline: "Government lawyer faces skeptical questions at appeals court hearing on Trump immigration order," and later edited it to "Federal appeals court weighs Trump immigration order"
The SF Chronicle didn't go so far, but still headlined with: "Court hints at keeping Trump order on hold"
The LA Times: "Court questions whether Trump's travel ban amounts to anti-Muslim discrimination"
The WSJ had a different spin: "Court Grills Lawyers on Donald Trump's Immigration Order" with the sub headline, "Judges fired tough questions at both sides in hearing over Trump's travel ban, promising a quick ruling"
Our earlier story on the oral arguments.