They are now due to hear arguments on October 10 on the legality of the bans on travellers from six mostly Muslim countries and refugees anywhere in the world. The current dispute is over which immigrants and refugees can enter in the meantime.
On Tuesday, the full court said it had granted the administration's appeal.
However, the Supreme Court granted an emergency stay request filed by the administration on Monday, temporarily halting the Ninth Circuit's ruling and keeping in limbo the fate of refugees blocked from entry by the travel ban.
Earlier on Tuesday the state of Hawaii, which challenged the policy, said in a court filing that the USA government could still "bar tens of thousands of refugees from entering the country".
Challengers countered on Tuesday that the court should not get involved in "ensuring that every possible refugee is excluded".
The fight between the government and lawyers for Hawaii, which is challenging the executive order, over the summer has focused on what constitutes a "bona fide relationship". The airports themselves were overwhelmed because they were not properly prepared.
The US Supreme Court has allowed Donald Trump to implement a travel ban on several predominantly Muslim countries. A decision isn't expected until next spring.
AMERICA'S federal courts have been almost unanimous in blocking or limiting Donald Trump's presidency-long quest to keep refugees and travellers from six Muslim majority nations out of the country. The justices declined to define the required relationships more precisely. Federal District Court Judge Derrick Watson in Hawaii later ordered the list expanded to include grandparents, grandchildren, aunts, uncles, cousins and in-laws.
In June, the top court allowed parts of the travel ban to go into effect while saying those who have a "credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States" should be exempted. It was that appeal that first Kennedy, and now the whole Supreme Court, took up.