The Ninth Circuit's 28-page decision does not address the ultimate merits of the president's executive order, but it is a powerful reaffirmation of the bedrock principles that the president's power is always subject to what is provided for in the Constitution, and that interpretation of constitutional authority is always a matter for judicial review.  Briefly, here are what I see as the president's four options in response to the 9th Circuit's decision:

First, the Adminstration can immediately appeal to the Supreme Court to challenge the denial of the Administration's request to lift the stay. That would not be a decision on the merits, and would require the Administration to convince one of the four liberal justices to overturn the Ninth Circuit.

Second, it could request en banc reconsideration by a panel of 11 9th circuit justices, and then appeal that decision to the Supreme Court (which would leave the Administration in the same position as the first option--assuming the en banc panel were to reach the same decision as the initial 3-judge panel).

Third, the Administration can present its case to the district court on the merits and/or wait for a more favorable decision in a circuit other than the 9th circuit, and use that decision to defend the executive order by creating a split in the circuits warranting Supreme Court review on the merits.

Fourth, the Administration can tear up the current executive order and rewrite one that will: a) be indisputably lawful; b) have a real relationship to real terror threats; c) help to foster a consensus instead of dividing Americans like the current order is helping to do.

I'm not picking 4 if I'm a betting person.