A US appeals court has posed tough questions at those challenging and defending President Donald Trump’s controversial travel ban.

The order banned entry for all refugees and visitors from seven mainly Muslim nations, until it was halted last week.

The three-judge panel raised questions over the limits on the president’s power and Trump’s evidence to link the seven countries to terrorism.

But it also asked whether the measure could be considered anti-Muslim.

A decision from the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, in San Francisco, is expected later this week. Whatever it decides, the case will probably end up in the Supreme Court.

There was an hour of oral arguments from both sides on Tuesday.

The Justice Department was first to make its case, urging the appeal judges to reinstate the banning order.

Lawyer August Flentje said Congress had authorized the president to control who can enter the country.

When asked to point to evidence that the seven countries affected - Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen - present a risk to the US, he said a number of Somalis in the US had been connected to the al-Shabab group.

Then a lawyer representing Washington State told the court that halting the executive order had not harmed the US government.

Solicitor General Noah Purcell said the ban had affected thousands of residents of the state, with students delayed as they tried to come to Washington and others prevented from visiting family abroad.

BDST: 1615 HRS, FEB 8, 2017