Date :Wednesday, June 27th, 2018 | Time : 08:15 |ID: 65151 | Print

Us supreme court upholds travel ban

, , ,

SHAFAQNA – The Supreme Court ruled in favor of President Donald Trump’s September order to restrict travel from several majority Muslim countries to the United States.

The travel restriction, the administration’s third, affects people from Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen. Chad was dropped from the list of affected countries in April. Previous versions of the ban were revised after facing challenges in.

According to The Guardian, the US supreme court has upheld Donald Trump’s travel ban targeting several Muslim-majority countries, in a significant victory for the administration and a blow to anti-discrimination advocates.

In a 5-4 ruling handed down on Tuesday, the court accepted the government’s argument that the ban was within the president’s power to craft national security policy and his authority to “suspend entry of aliens into the United States”.

The court held that challengers had failed to show that the ban violates either U.S. immigration law or the US Constitution’s First Amendment prohibition on the govt favoring one religion over another.

The travel ban was one of Trump’s signature hardline immigration policies that have been a central part of his presidency and “America First” approach. Trump issued his first version just a week after taking office, though it was quickly halted by the courts.

Chad initially was on the list of countries targeted by Trump that was announced in September, but he removed it on April 10. Iraq and Sudan were on earlier versions of the ban. Venezuela and North Korea also were targeted in the current policy. Those restrictions were not challenged in court, ABS-CBN reported.

Minutes after the ruling was issued, Trump tweeted: “SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS TRUMP TRAVEL BAN. Wow!”

Supreme court rules in favour of anti-abortion clinics in first amendment case.

Trump, who has called the travel ban necessary to protect the country against attacks by Islamic militants.

president said in a statement that the ruling was a “profound vindication” after “months of hysterical commentary from the media and Democratic politicians who refuse to do what it takes to secure our border and our country.””Our country will always be safe, secure, and protected on my watch,” Trump said.

Trump has called the travel ban necessary to protect the country against attacks by Islamic militants. The White House called the ruling “a tremendous victory for the American people” and said the supreme court “has upheld the clear authority of the president to defend the national security of the United States” despite “months of hysterical commentary from the media and Democratic politicians”.

Opponents of the ban have said it has not made the country safer, while singling out Muslims for unfair treatment and violating constitutional protections against discrimination on religious grounds.

“This hateful policy is a catastrophe all around – not only for those who simply want to travel, work, or study here in the States, but for those seeking safety from violence as well,” Ryan Mace of Amnesty International USA said in a statement. Civil rights groups and Democrats denounced the ruling. “The ruling will go down in history as one of the Supreme Court’s great failures,” said Omar Jadwat, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, which challenged the ban.

According to Economic Times, the challengers, though, argued that the court could not just ignore all that has happened, beginning with Trump’s campaign tweets to prevent the entry of Muslims into the United States.

Strongly disagreeing, Democratic Rep. Keith Ellison of Minnesota said, “This decision will someday serve as a marker of shame.” Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress, and Sen. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, who was born in Japan, both compared the ban and the ruling to the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II.

Critics of Trump’s ban had urged the justices to affirm the decisions in lower courts that generally concluded that the changes made to the travel policy did not erase the ban’s legal problems.

The ban has been widely criticised by human rights and refugee advocacy groups.


Read more from Shafaqna: 




0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *