Photo courtesy of Al Jareeza.
Summary: The Supreme Court ruled that Trump’s current travel ban was legal.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that President Donald Trump’s travel ban was constitutional.
The majority ruling was written by Chief Justice John Roberts who said that the president had the power to regulate immigration. He added that the court rejected critics view that the ban was discriminatory towards Muslims.
“The text says nothing about religion,” Roberts wrote. “Plaintiffs and the dissent nonetheless emphasize that five of the seven nations currently included in the (ban) have Muslim-majority populations. Yet that fact alone does not support an inference of religious hostility, given that the policy covers just 8 percent of the world’s Muslim population and is limited to countries that were previously designated by Congress or prior administrations as posing national security risks.”
The travel ban barred immigrants from Muslim-majority countries Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen as well as from North Korea and Venezuela. Critics called the ban a “Muslim Ban” because Trump had made disparaging comments about Muslims during his 2016 campaign, according to NBC News.
“A reasonable observer would conclude that the Proclamation was motivated by anti-Muslim animus,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in her dissent.
The travel ban that was approved on Tuesday was its third iteration. The first draft was implemented in February 2017, but it was hastily written. This resulted in travel delays for people with visas and chaos at airports as officials struggled to enforce the confusing new rules.
Amidst backlash, the Trump administration released a second travel ban, which was also deemed too broad. A third ban was written, and the Trump administration said that the countries on the list did not meet the US standards for security clearances.
On Tuesday, Trump tweeted his happiness with the court’s decision, ignoring the huge backlash he received from liberals on the platform.
“The Supreme Court has upheld the clear authority of the President to defend the national security of the United States,” Trump said. “In this era of worldwide terrorism and extremist movements bent on harming innocent civilians, we must properly vet those coming into our country. This ruling is also a moment of profound vindication following months of hysterical commentary from the media and Democratic politicians who refuse to do what it takes to secure our border and our country.”
When the Justice Department originally defended the travel bans, it stated that the Constitution allowed Trump broad authority to regulate immigration. Challengers, however, said that federal law only gave the president power to ban foreigners who had characteristics that made them harmful. They stated that Trump’s broad ban on Muslim-majority countries was based upon his prejudice against the religion and that he was incorrectly grouping millions in with terrorists.
The travel ban in question has been implemented since December. All immigration was suspended from Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, Yemen and Somalia; travelers with business or tourist visas could visit from Libya, Venezuela and Yemen; and Iranians are eligible for student or exchange visas.
- SCOTUS Seems To Support Trump’s Travel Ban
- Second Judge Rules Against Trump Travel Ban
- Trump’s Travel Ban to Be Replaced with Country-Specific Restrictions
- Federal Judge Halts Trump’s Third Travel Ban
- Supreme Court Allows Portions of Travel Ban to Be Enforced