US Supreme Court partially restores Trump travel ban

Alain Brian
Juin 26, 2017

The justices removed the lower courts' injunctions against the ban "with respect to foreign nationals who lack any bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States", narrowing the scope of two injunctions that had put the ban in limbo.

Mr Trump said last week that the ban would take effect within 72 hours of being cleared by the courts.

The original ban, put in place shortly after Trump's inauguration, barred everyone from seven countries from entering the USA even if they had green cards, valid visas or refugee status.

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals looked extensively at whether the travel ban violated the Constitution by discriminating on the basis of religion. The administration review should be complete before October 2, the first day the justices could hear arguments in their new term.

The original measure, issued by executive order in January, also included Iraq on the list of targeted countries and had imposed an indefinite ban on Syrian refugees.

Three of the court's conservative justices said they would have let the complete bans take effect.

Thomas said he would have stayed the injunctions "in full", adding the government is "likely to succeed on the merits". Thomas said the government's interest in preserving national security outweighs any hardship to people denied entry into the country.

This is the first time the high court has weighed in on the travel ban, and a partial victory for the Trump administration, which has been fighting lower court rulings blocking the ban from taking effect. The White House did not immediately comment.

Even before the Supreme Court action the ban applied only to new visa applicants, not people who already have visas or are USA permanent residents, known as green card holders.

"For individuals, a close familial relationship is required", the court said. The court, in an unsigned opinion, left the travel ban against citizens of six majority-Muslim on hold as applied to non-citizens with relationships with persons or entities in the United States, which includes most of the plaintiffs in both cases.

The ruling from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals focused on federal law. It was blocked by federal judges before going into effect on March 16 as planned.

D'autres rapports CampDesrEcrues

Discuter de cet article

SUIVRE NOTRE JOURNAL