A federal appeals court upheld Thursday a lower court’s temporary block of key provisions of President Donald Trump‘s revised executive order banning travel from some Middle East and African countries.

In the decision, Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Chief Judge Roger Gregory writes that the executive order “in text speaks with vague words of national security, but in context drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination.” The opinion continues that while the president has power to limit entry to the country, “that power is not absolute.”

“It cannot go unchecked when, as here, the President wields it through an executive edict that stands to cause irreparable harm to individuals across this nation,” Gregory writes.

Trump’s order was his second attempt to limit immigration and travel to the United States. In February, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied a bid for an emergency stay from the Department of Justice in response to a Washington state federal judge’s temporary restraining order blocking the president’s original order.

In March, Trump issued the revised order which he would later call a “watered-down” version of the first. Trump’s and his associates’ comments about their desire to prevent Muslims from entering the country during the presidential campaign were highlighted in rulings by federal judges in Hawaii and Maryland blocking the latest attempt. The government argued that the order was not intended to discriminate on the basis of religion.

The appellate court took the deepest dive yet into the issue of whether statements made by candidate Trump should be considered in evaluating the executive order he issued after he became president.

“The campaign statements here are probative of purpose because they are closely related in time, attributable to the primary decision maker, and specific and easily connected to the challenged action,” reads the majority opinion.

“In this highly unique set of circumstances, there is a direct link between the President’s numerous campaign statements promising a Muslim ban that targets territories, the discrete action he took only one week into office executing that exact plan,” the opinion adds.

The American Civil Liberties Union issued a statement Thursday in response to the Fourth Circuit’s ruling, saying, “President Trump’s Muslim ban violates the Constitution, as this decision strongly reaffirms. The Constitution’s prohibition on actions disfavoring or condemning any religion is a fundamental protection for all of us, and we can all be glad that the court today rejected the government’s request to set that principle aside.”

This is a developing story. Please check back for details.