Previous post
In a huge lower court reversal, the Supreme Court has announced that it will review the executive order issued by President Trump that halts travel from six countries on a temporary basis, and that the order can go into effect.
BREAKING: Supreme Court will review Trump travel ban, allows it to take effect in most instances.
— The Associated Press (@AP) June 26, 2017
The Supreme Court is letting the Trump administration mostly enforce its 90-day ban on travelers from six mostly Muslim countries, overturning lower court orders that blocked it.
The action Monday is a victory for President Donald Trump in the biggest legal controversy of his young presidency.
The court did leave one category of foreigners protected, those “with a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States,” the court said in an unsigned opinion.
The justices will hear arguments in the case in October.
The six countries listed by the order are Iran, Syria, Libya, Sudan, Somalia, and Yemen. As readers will recall, this has been an ongoing effort by the Trump administration to get this executive order to stick – after first botching it up – and fighting the courts. SCOTUS has just overturned federal judges and two courts of appeals with this acceptance of the case and issuing a stay on the courts’ actions.
Supreme Court: US National Security Outweighs Refugee Claims. Travel Ban Reinstated pic.twitter.com/2QXY6Arn7j
— Angry GoT Jack (@JackPosobiec) June 26, 2017
The Supreme Court also announced other decisions and opinions today – notably, the decision to take a case regarding a bakery being sued by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission over not making a cake for a same-sex wedding on religious grounds. Justice Gorsuch’s first full term on the SCOTUS bench should prove to be an awfully interesting one.
UPDATE 12:50 PM EDT:
Just because SCOTUS is supposed to be nonpartisan, doesn’t mean that they don’t pay attention to the news.
Supreme Court, writing unanimously in the travel ban case, is wise to how liberal activist groups operate pic.twitter.com/Nu97q4omkY
— Dan McLaughlin (@baseballcrank) June 26, 2017
Looks like the justices have a handle on how this game is being played.
“with a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States,”
That might be a loophole you can drive a semi full of illegal aliens through. Or not. But it signals a huge slapdown on those lower activist courts.
The SCOTUS also ruled that a Missouri church pre-school was un-Constitutionally discriminated against when it was denied some state funding (a grant) that was otherwise available to all pre-schools. They basically slapped down all Blaine Amendments, everywhere.
Oooooh, as to the loophole, they evidently wrote this in the decision (retyped from Twitchy):
For example, a nonprofit group devoted to immigration issues may not contact foreign nationals from the designated countries, add them to client lists, and then secure their entry by claiming injury from their exclusion.
Big ol’ speed bump to that semi!
4 Comments