Court partly reinstates Trump travel ban, fall arguments set

Bruno Cirelli
Giugno 27, 2017

The court is allowing the 90-day ban on people coming to the USA from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen, overturning lower court rulings that blocked it. Trump has said the ban would go into effect 72 hours after the ruling.

When the Trump administration rolled out the President's first executive order in January, bedlam ensued nearly immediately as foreigners from seven predominately Muslim countries tried to enter the United States, only to be turned away at the border or separated from loved ones overseas.

But the other six kept blocking it as it applies to those traveling to the US on employment, student or family immigrant visas as well as other cases where the traveler can show a "bona fide" connection to the U.S.

The travel ban had been blocked by two lower courts, which ruled that Trump abused his authority and discriminated against Muslims as a religious minority by issuing the ban by executive order.

Gorsuch was one of the three conservative justices who would have granted Trump's request to put the order completely into effect.

Arrivals from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen were down by almost half in March and April from a year ago - 6,372 for the two months compared to 12,100 in 2016, according to recent official data.

"As president, I can not allow people into our country who want to do us harm".

Julie Samuels, executive director of Tech:NYC, worries the partial travel ban could "keep out the future founders and job creators whom we most want to attract to the United States".

"That's going to be an extreme headache".

"Today's order will create more confusion, delays, and litigation", says Stephen Yale-Loehr, a professor of immigration law practice at Cornell Law School.

"This unanimous decision is a win for national security and a major check on the power of overreaching activist judges seeking to push their own agenda", said U.S. Rep.

While the court has set a standard for unlawful racial gerrymanders, it has never come up with a test that goes to how much politics can play a role in the drawing of district lines after each census.

"We could have dozens of these cases between now and September", Vladeck said, adding that the Supreme Court would not be likely to weigh in on them on a case-by-case basis.

"As President, I can not allow people into our country who want to do us harm", President Trump said in a statement, via CNN.

The Supreme Court order provides a few examples of what a "bona fide" relationship might look like: a foreign national who wants to visit family, traveler with an employment offer from a US business, a student admitted to a university. Trump wrote in a tweet that would ultimately find its way in one of the Ninth Circuit rulings blocking the ban. She says the USA government will keep people traveling to the US and members of the travel industry informed "in a professional, organized and timely way".

Trump's first executive order on travel applied to travelers from Iraq and well as the six countries, and took effect immediately, causing chaos and panic at airports over the last weekend in January as the Homeland Security Department scrambled to figure out whom the order covered and how it was to be implemented.

After it was blocked by the courts, Trump tried again in March with a revised version that didn't include Iraq and was meant to clarify problems of the first order that created uncertainty about the rights of dual citizens and holders of United States visas. "If it is argued and dismissed as moot, the lower court decisions are vacated". Gorsuch is a stickler for the written text of statutes - and banning Muslims isn't mentioned in Trump's executive order.

Both bans are now due to partly go into effect in 72 hours, based on a memorandum issued by the Trump administration on June 14. The Trump administration vows to challenge the rulings.

"The 16 pages did not include any citations to President Trump's campaign rhetoric", said CNN senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin.

In appealing to the high court, acting U.S. Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall contended the judges had wrongly "second guessed" the president's determination that travelers from these six nations could threaten the nation's security.

Altre relazioni OverNewsmagazine

Discuti questo articolo

SEGUI I NOSTRI GIORNALE