Ruling in travel ban leaves myriad questions unanswered

Bruno Cirelli
Giugno 28, 2017

Gorsky said the standard is likely to sow confusion among U.S. consular officials who have to make visa decisions and could require another court decision to determine what constitutes a connection to the United States sufficient to allow entry.

There may be less confusion as the ban is partially reinstated.

But the court concluded that foreigners who have no ties to the US can not argue, on their own, that constitutional protections apply to them.

The Connecticut chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) issued an advisory on Monday urging local Muslims to speak with an immigration lawyer before traveling internationally.

The justices agreed with the appeals courts that people should be able to enter the country per usual so long as they have "a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States".

Immigrant rights advocates welcomed the ruling for showing that the president's authority on immigration is not absolute and ensuring people with connections in the US will be allowed to enter. So would a worker who accepted a job from an American company, a student enrolled at a US university or a lecturer invited to address a USA audience. So the ban now will affect only travelers with no prior ties to the U.S. The six countries are Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

"In theory, you could say if somebody is coming for tourism and has made a reservation for a hotel, there's now a US interest in bringing them to the United States".

During Monday afternoon's off-camera White House press briefing, the often embattled Spicer reaffirmed the use of "unanimous" but later said he had to check with the White House Counsel's office. So far, the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees C.B.P., has said little about how it plans to implement the new terms of the order.

It was a legal win for the administration - to an extent.

Trump's original travel ban, announced just one week after his January inauguration, took effect immediately and caused chaos at airports across North America when it was imposed on citizens of the six countries, plus Iraq. According to Heller, any asylum-seeker who has been assigned to an American resettlement agency-an "entity" in the USA -is qualified to enter the country under the terms of the Supreme Court's ruling.

"For the court to revisit the injunctions is another disturbing step", he said.

The State Department says after the 50,000 refugee cap is reached, new people hoping to come to the US may be required to show a "bona fide" relationship with someone or some entity in the United States.

"Many of these individuals may not have "bona fide relationships", but have strong reasons to look to the United States for protection". While visiting parents or siblings clearly fits the bill, visiting a cousin, aunt, uncle or relative by marriage is less clear. They said there was "no big change" in the visa process when they applied at the U.S. Consulate in Armenia. The court's majority laid out the "bona fide" relationships it had in mind.

There appears to be even less clarity about what qualifies as a connection to an institution, which means the issue could be up for debate and thus open the government up to legal challenges. "What's more hard is if you're coming in on a tourist visa". Critics called it a discriminatory "Muslim ban".

Legal experts also say that the government could run into problems in trying to obtain proper documentation from foreigners who are trying to prove that they meet the necessary criteria.

"We are deeply disappointed by the Supreme Court's ruling to uphold the portion of the Trump administration's travel ban that halts the admittance of refugees to safety in the United States".

"Today's compromise will burden executive officials with the task of deciding - on peril of contempt - whether individuals from the six affected nations who wish to enter the United States have a sufficient connection to a person or entity in this country", Thomas wrote, joined by two fellow conservative justices.

Altre relazioni OverNewsmagazine

Discuti questo articolo