Supreme Court Will Decide Travel Ban Constitutionality, Reviving Rules In The Interim

Perdue applauds travel ban reinstatement

The US President said the Supreme Court ruling was a "victory for our national security".

Montana State University has just one student who's traveling overseas and might be affected by the U.S. Supreme Court's decision Monday to reinstate, with limits, the Trump administration's travel ban on six Muslim-majority countries. "That's a legal standard that was invented this morning". For individuals, a close family relationship is required: A spouse or a mother-in-law would be permitted. The court said the administration can block travellers from Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Libya, Iran and Yemen unless they can prove a "bona fide relationship" with a person or entity in the United States.

The Department of Justice has retorted to the Fourth Circuit that there is no language in the executive order referring to religion and that courts should not have considered Trump's campaign statements about Muslim countries. The ban has faced repeated legal challenges, resulting in multiple stays from lower courts that completely blocked its implementation.

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear his appeal of the so-called travel ban after several federal courts blocked it. The Court will hear oral arguments pertaining to the legality of the new E.O. during the first session of October Term 2017.

However, until it can issue a definitive ruling, the high court authorized the Trump administration to deny United States entry to people affected by the ban who do not have relatives in the U.S. or who have no previously established plans to work at companies or study at educational institutions in the US. The court's opinion explained the kinds of relationships people from the six countries must demonstrate to obtain a US visa.

Q What about refugees coming from places like Syria or other war-torn countries? "It allows the travel suspension for the six terror-prone countries and the refugee suspension to become largely effective".

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 USA will be allowed to enter.

Q Are there still big questions? . As of May 31 of this year, 46,403 refugees have been admitted into the US - close to the cap of 50,000 that the Trump administration put into place.

The Supreme Court also delivered a victory for religious liberty.

Q What about Mr Trump's decision to limit the number of refugees admitted each year to 50,000 people?

Lavinia Limon, CEO of the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, said she was dismayed by the ruling, but insisted that her agency has "an existing relationship with incoming refugees, certified and arranged through the Department of State". Thomas went on to criticize the Court for creating an essentially unworkable solution, and that the measure of what sufficient ties to the United States will mean for this rule are not clear.

Q Is this a final ruling? .

The Supreme Court did not change the duration of Trump's travel ban.

What qualifies as a "bona fide" connection? Immigration attorneys have said the court's language is not sufficiently specific.

According to the court, Bona fide relationships may include employees who have accepted a job with a US company and students accepted to a USA university.

"In January, when it first came in, we didn't receive a lot of people from those countries already".

Related News: