White House reportedly rewriting travel ban after appeals court ruling

The White House is reportedly redrafting President Donald Trump's temporary travel and refugee freeze following the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' suspension of the controversial ban.

According to unnamed sources who spoke to NBC News Friday, the Trump administration began working on a replacement order several days before the appeals court issued its ruling on Thursday evening. The original order blocked travel to the U.S. from seven Muslim-majority countries for 90 days and halted the refugee resettlement program for 120 days.

The White House official told NBC that Trump still stands by the original action, but noted that the administration is considering revising some of the language:

Trump's legal team still believes it will be eventually proven correct on the merits of the current executive order, the official said. And they are looking into several options, including continuing the court battle as well as signing a new immigration EO "very soon."

Several sources close to President Trump told MSNBC's Joe Scarborough that White House lawyers are working on language for the executive order that would be able to find favor with the federal courts.

Trump answered questions about the executive order during a White House press conference with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzō Abe on Friday. He told reporters that his administration will be "doing something very rapidly" to increase security in the U.S., adding: "You'll be seeing that sometime next week."

"We will continue to go through the court process," the president said. "And, ultimately, I have no doubt that we'll win that particular case."

Trump on travel ban: "We’ll be doing something very rapidly" on security. "You’ll be seeing that sometime next week" https://t.co/PrstelUqPm pic.twitter.com/g30MLozoXh

— CNN (@CNN) February 10, 2017

Trump took to Twitter immediately after the court issued its suspension of his travel ban, voicing outrage that the decision puts the "security of our nation at stake."

The judges, who ruled 3-0 against Trump's travel ban, dismissed the Justice Department's assertion that presidential decisions about immigration policy relating to national security are not up for legal review. Fox News' senior judicial analyst, Judge Andrew Napolitano, disagreed with the the court's ruling, claiming the Constitution gives jurisdiction on matters of foreign policy "exclusively to the president."

"There is no precedent to support [Trump's] claimed unreviewability, which runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy," the judges wrote in their decision.

The ruling from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals came after District Judge James Robart, a Seattle-based judge appointed by former President George W. Bush, issued a temporary restraining order last Friday that blocked Trump's travel freeze.

The president argued at the time that the restraining order, issued by a "so-called judge," was a danger to Americans' safety.

Trump's critics have argued that the temporary travel freeze was a "Muslim ban." The White House has argued against such accusations.

"This is not about religion," Trump said in a statement from the White House last month. "This is about terror and keeping our country safe. There are over 40 different countries worldwide that are majority Muslim that are not affected by this order."

Trump signed the original executive order on Jan. 27.