Reaction to Supreme Court decision upholding Trump’s ‘travel ban’

Almost 5,000 were found “ineligible” for visas for other, unspecified reasons unrelated to the travel ban.

“The Muslim ban is not something that is isolated”, Walid warned.

There should be a healthy debate about the travel ban, the president’s controversial approach to immigration, and the court’s role in either enabling or restraining Trump policies. McConnell refused to act on Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland, and the seat was left open for a year until Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch. This was painfully obvious in the travel-ban decision: The justices, scoring points as if in a debating competition, missed the big-picture impact their decision would have on discrimination generally and on the president’s shaky regard for the rule of law.

When I went to The New York Times home page yesterday morning, I couldn’t even find the original news story on the ruling.

Although a judge in Hawaii ordered the government last fall not to enforce the latest travel ban, the Supreme Court lifted that order in December, and the restrictions have been in place since then. They say it will help stop terrorism.

The win follows two embarrassing climbdowns for the administration’s “zero tolerance” policy on migrants crossing the Mexico border and with Trump under mounting pressure to legislate a solution to the immigration crisis, one of the most polarising debates in USA politics.

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: The ruling shows that all of the attacks from the media and the Democrat politicians are wrong, and they turned out to be very wrong.

Another top Republican, Sen. It also said the president’s order provided “numerous exceptions for various categories of foreign nationals” and also created a waiver program to “all covered foreign nationals seeking entry as immigrants or nonimmigrants”.

Critics of Trump’s decision on the joint military exercises say it is a major concession to North Korea that, if prolonged during what are expected to be lengthy negotiations, risk eroding the readiness of US and South Korean forces.

He called it “a backward and un-American policy” that fails to improve national security.

Mr Trump responded to the decision with a “Wow!” on Twitter. She accused her colleagues of “ignoring the facts, misconstruing our legal precedent, and turning a blind eye to the pain and suffering the proclamation inflicts upon countless families and individuals, many of whom are United States citizens”. John Cornyn of Texas says that despite claims by some Democrats, “This is not a Muslim ban”. “When I’m governor, Donald Trump will know his hate has no place in IL, and I will protect our immigrant families and fight back against Trump’s bigoted agenda at every turn”.

This is the third manifestation of the “Muslim ban” that Trump promised in his presidential campaign; after issuing the Department of Homeland Security to comprehensively evaluate the compliance of information and risk assessment baseline of every nation. United States, which upheld the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II. Today’s ruling lifts that uncertainty and clears the way for continued enforcement.

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Trump v. Hawaii on Tuesday rightfully joins Dred Scott and Korematsu in infamy as a shameful abrogation of the Constitutional principle of equal rights under the law.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in California, along with the 4th Circuit in Virginia, upheld the district judges who had blocked Trump’s order.

But members from the Japanese American Citizens League – who said they were gathered to support their Muslim allies – wanted to tell the Supreme Court they believe that the ruling isn’t making history; it is instead allowing history to repeat itself.

LEVITT: What any other state can take from today’s decision is that if I intend to discriminate, a court may nip and tuck a bit.

‘While the USA supreme court ruled that the president has the authority to implement the existing travel ban, the court did not rule on whether such a policy is wise.

Roberts seemed careful not to tie the court to Trump’s remarks. On Tuesday, Ferguson filed his 27th such lawsuit, leading a group of 17 states and the District of Columbia in challenging the administration’s forcible separation of families at the U.S. -Mexico border. He said the United States needs to reclaim its values: “We’re a good nation, we’re a good people”.