Mercredi, 22 Novembre 2017
Dernières nouvelles
Principale » Options for Supreme Court on Trump travel ban

Options for Supreme Court on Trump travel ban

26 Juin 2017

The Supreme Court left the lower-court injunctions against the ban in place, but only with respect to the challengers to the ban themselves and others in similar circumstances, meaning they involve people in the United States who have relationships with foreign nationals overseas and whose rights might be affected if those foreigners were excluded from entry.

"Denying entry to such a foreign national does not burden any American party by reason of that party's relationship with the foreign national", the court said.

Lower federal courts have so far agreed and blocked the travel ban.

The most notable of three immigration-related cases in which rulings are due on Monday is a dispute over whether immigrants detained by the US government for more than six months while deportation proceedings unfold should be able to request their release.

As the justices look to finish work before their summer break, they must decide what to do with Trump's travel ban, which was blocked by lower courts. It would also ban Syrian refugees from entering the country.

"As President, I can not allow people into our country who want to do us harm".

"The Executive Branch is entrusted with the responsibility to keep the country safe under Article II of the Constitution", U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement after the 9th Circuit ruling. Today's ruling allows me to use an important tool for protecting our Nation's homeland.

The last day of the Supreme Court's term was notable not only for what was announced but also for what wasn't.

May reaches deal with DUP to back Tories through Brexit
Some Conservatives have raised concerns about linking up with the DUP because of its opposition to same-sex marriage and abortion. The talks focused on financial support for Northern Ireland and Brexit.

- Barred immigrants from seven predominantly Muslim countries - Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen - from entering the United States for 90 days.

The decision represents a victory for President Donald Trump in the biggest legal controversy of his young presidency.

In terms of a replacement, Kennedy might take comfort in the list of 20 judges Trump has vowed to draw from when considering the next vacancy on the court.

Those courts had argued the president had overstepped his authority, and that his executive order discriminated against travelers based on their nationality.

When the justices take the bench Monday, they are expected to decide the case of Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Missouri, which was excluded from a state grant program to pay for soft surfaces on playgrounds run by not-for-profit groups.

Both courts mentioned burdens on US citizens imposed by the travel ban, with one case involving the restricted travel of family members of USA citizens and another involving students who had been admitted to US universities. He was a federal judge, and had no involvement in the formulation or roll out of the travel policy.

What happens if the Supreme Court rules in Trump's favor?

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a decision concurring and dissenting in part with the majority, saying he thought the travel ban should be permitted to continue in full, with no exceptions. Three of those, all involving immigrants or foreigners, were heard by an eight-justice court, before Gorsuch joined the bench in April. He has already appointed one conservative justice, Neil Gorsuch.

Options for Supreme Court on Trump travel ban