On Monday, the US Supreme Court ruled the latest iteration of President Donald Trump’s travel ban can take full effect.
Lower courts continue to deal with frivolous lawsuits that seek to fight the ban, despite the fact that it is constitutional.
According to the order, the Trump administration is permitted to enforce Trump’s ban, which suspends foreign nationals from seven nations from entering the united States.
Those seven countries are Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen.
The only dissent from the court came from Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor.
Fox News reports:
The justices offered no explanation for their order, but the administration had said that blocking the full ban was causing “irreparable harm” because the policy is based on legitimate national security and foreign policy concerns.
The proclamation of the ban was issued by Trump in September after a second version of the ban had expired. In that proclamation, Trump wrote:
In Executive Order 13780 of March 6, 2017 (Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States), on the recommendations of the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General, I ordered a worldwide review of whether, and if so what, additional information would be needed from each foreign country to assess adequately whether their nationals seeking to enter the United States pose a security or safety threat. This was the first such review of its kind in United States history. As part of the review, the Secretary of Homeland Security established global requirements for information sharing in support of immigration screening and vetting. The Secretary of Homeland Security developed a comprehensive set of criteria and applied it to the information-sharing practices, policies, and capabilities of foreign governments. The Secretary of State thereafter engaged with the countries reviewed in an effort to address deficiencies and achieve improvements. In many instances, those efforts produced positive results. By obtaining additional information and formal commitments from foreign governments, the United States Government has improved its capacity and ability to assess whether foreign nationals attempting to enter the United States pose a security or safety threat. Our Nation is safer as a result of this work.
Despite those efforts, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Attorney General, has determined that a small number of countries — out of nearly 200 evaluated — remain deficient at this time with respect to their identity-management and information-sharing capabilities, protocols, and practices. In some cases, these countries also have a significant terrorist presence within their territory.
As President, I must act to protect the security and interests of the United States and its people. I am committed to our ongoing efforts to engage those countries willing to cooperate, improve information-sharing and identity-management protocols and procedures, and address both terrorism-related and public-safety risks. Some of the countries with remaining inadequacies face significant challenges. Others have made strides to improve their protocols and procedures, and I commend them for these efforts. But until they satisfactorily address the identified inadequacies, I have determined, on the basis of recommendations from the Secretary of Homeland Security and other members of my Cabinet, to impose certain conditional restrictions and limitations, as set forth more fully below, on entry into the United States of nationals of the countries identified in section 2 of this proclamation.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and 1185(a), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, hereby find that, absent the measures set forth in this proclamation, the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of persons described in section 2 of this proclamation would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and that their entry should be subject to certain restrictions, limitations, and exceptions.
It’s interesting how this ban has been changed, not just in the substance of the ban, but also in the countries listed. For instance, North Korea and Venezuela are now on the list. Sharia-promoting Linda Sarsour called travel bans of those countries “Muslim bans,” but they are nothing of the sort.
North Korea was recently listed as a terrorism-sponsoring state and Venezuela abandoned the petrodollar in September and began preparing for war with the US.
The previous list included Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Somalia and the Sudan, who have produced numerous Islamic terrorists in the US are not on the list anymore.
The Department of Justice asked the court to lift lower court orders barring enforcement of the proclamation while legal challenges are adjudicated by the courts.
The court agreed to lift those orders.
Federal courts in Maryland and Hawaii blocked enforcement of key provisions of the ban shortly after it was issued. Judges in both cases are tied to Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah.
Again, from Fox:
Both courts are scheduled to hear arguments in those cases this week.
Both courts are also dealing with the issue on an accelerated basis, and the Supreme Court noted it expects those courts to reach decisions “with appropriate dispatch.”
Quick resolution by appellate courts would allow the Supreme Court to hear and decide the issue this term, by the end of June.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld portions of those orders, which concluded any national from six of the eight countries named in the order with a significant connection to the United States may still enter the country.
White House Deputy Press Secretary Hogan Gidley called the ban “lawful and essential to protecting our homeland.”
“We look forward to presenting a fuller defense of the proclamation as the pending cases work their way through the courts,” Gidley added in a written statement.
“We are pleased that the Supreme Court has agreed to allow us to fulfill this most vital mission performed by any sovereign nation. DHS will continue to fully implement the President’s robust and Constitutional counterterrorism agenda in accordance with the law,” the Department of Homeland Security’s acting press secretary, Tyler Q. Houlton, said.
The Communist American Civil Liberties Union was upset by the ruling.
“President Trump’s anti-Muslim prejudice is no secret — he has repeatedly confirmed it, including just last week on Twitter,” Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, said in a statement. “It’s unfortunate that the full ban can move forward for now, but this order does not address the merits of our claims. We continue to stand for freedom, equality, and for those who are unfairly being separated from their loved ones. We will be arguing Friday in the Fourth Circuit that the ban should ultimately be struck down.”
Don’t forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook and Twitter, and follow our friends at RepublicanLegion.com.
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon to the right of the comment, and report it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation. If you don’t see a commenting section below, please disable your adblocker.