Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Trump Administration on Travel Ban

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Trump Administration on Travel Ban

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Trump Administration on Travel Ban

"Once again, this conservative-majority court sided with anti-worker forces and issued a ruling created to undermine public sector unions".

"Obviously we join the rest of the American Muslim community in being deeply, deeply disappointed by this ruling, which is going to lead to continued hardship for countless Muslim families", he said. "Today's Supreme Court ruling on his travel ban is a vindication of the president, his administration and the will of the American people", said Steve Bannon, a key architect of the original travel ban that sparked chaos at airports and was panned by critics as a glorified "Muslim ban".

The travel ban's stated goals of preventing entry to the USA of people who can not be adequately vetted and inducing other countries to improve their security practices provided legitimate justifications, Roberts said.

Taeb said the travel ban, which comes at the backdrop of the "zero-tolerance policy" at the USA border that has seen more than 2,000 children taken away from their families, was a policy centered on "advancing a white nationalist agenda".

The travel ban was one of Trump's signature hardline immigration policies that have been a central part of his presidency and "America First" approach. Our country will always be safe, secure, and protected on my watch. You might remember that in - when the first version of the travel ban was put forward, the Trump administration was making that argument, that decisions that the president made concerning who could come into the country were not even subject to judicial review.

"By blindly accepting the Government's misguided invitation to sanction a discriminatory policy motivated by animosity toward a disfavored group, all in the name of a superficial claim of national security, the Court redeploys the same risky logic underlying Korematsu and merely replaces one gravely wrong decision with another", she said.

Shortly after the Supreme Court released its decision, President Donald Trump shared the news from his Twitter account. Trump had also imposed a temporary ban on refugees along with earlier versions of the travel ban, but he did not reimpose a refugee ban when the last one expired in the fall.

He had repeatedly questioned the loyalty of Muslim immigrants and after a 2015 terror attack in San Bernardino, California, used his campaign to propose a "total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States". Instead, she wrote in her dissent, the majority only "briefly" recounted some of the statements and background events behind the ban.

The travel ban was implemented haphazardly at the start of the Trump administration and faced repeated setbacks from the U.S. legal system.

Gareth Southgate: ‘Let Germany defeat be a warning for England’
Against a defence as porous as Panama's has proved in their first two games of the tournament, he could well add to that tally. Vermaelen said: "I'm not that surprised what they are doing at this World Cup ".

In a dissent she summarized aloud in court, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said, "History will not look kindly on the court's misguided decision today, nor should it".

There's nothing in the Supreme Court ruling that would prevent the administration from adding a country to the list if it fell below the standards for cooperating with the U.S.in providing information about potential travelers.

The second ban expired, and the Supreme Court dismissed the Trump administration's appeals in relation to the prohibition. Supreme Court's decision upholding President Donald Trump's travel ban.

"I think not only will the ruling increase Islamophobia, it is an expression of Islamophobia", Hooper said at the rally outside the Supreme Court.

Roberts said it was "wholly inapt to liken that morally repugnant order to a facial neutral policy denying certain foreign nationals the privilege of admission".

"This is not the first time the Court has been wrong, or has allowed official racism and xenophobia to continue rather than standing up to it", the American Civil Liberties Union tweeted.

Christopher Richardson, a U.S. diplomat from 2011 to 2018 who most recently served at the U.S. Embassy in Madrid, stated in an affidavit in federal court this month that consular officers were not authorized to issue waivers on their own.

"While this decision doesn't address the separate and equally harmful ban on refugees, it cruelly traps people in conflict-afflicted countries and prevents them from seeking safety in the U.S. or being reunited with family", CNN quoted Mace as saying in a statement.

In the May 2017 documentary Bannon's War, FRONTLINE went inside the chaotic rollout of President Trump's initial suspension of travel into the U.S.by refugees and citizens from seven majority-Muslim nations on January 27, 2017.

Related news