Hans von Spakovsky: "No one should be surprised that a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel, made up of three judges appointed by President Bill Clinton, upheld the injunction on Monday against President Donald Trump's revised executive order temporarily halting entry from six terrorist safe haven nations".
The White House delayed the effective date of its revised travel ban to avoid mooting its case as the U.S.
Trump has previously said he would be willing to take the matter to the US Supreme Court in order to get the travel ban passed, a measure his administration argues is necessary of national security.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday afternoon ordered a new round of legal briefs in the controversy over President Trump's executive order seeking to impose new immigration restrictions, giving itself the option of considering on June 22 what to do with the two cases before it. The state of Hawaii has suggested a shorter briefing schedule. Gorsuch's confirmation by the U.S. Senate in April restored the court's 5-4 conservative majority.
Earlier this month, the Justice Department formally asked the Supreme Court to let the temporary ban on visitors from those six countries and refugees from around the world to be put in place.
The Supreme Court could discuss how to act on the emergency application at its private conference on June 22, a week after the Gorsuch ceremony. They are also considering a separate case, from Maryland, that was decided in May by a different appeals court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Both are at stake in the Hawaii case; the Maryland case involves only the 90-day suspension of arrivals from the designated nations.
The lawsuits by Hawaii and the Maryland challengers argued that the executive order violated federal immigration law and a section of the Constitution's First Amendment, which prohibits the government from favoring or disfavoring any particular religion. The second order was meant to overcome the legal issues posed by the original ban, but was blocked by judges before it could go into effect on March 16. Whatever the Supreme Court does in this case, we probably haven't heard the end of the president's efforts to fulfill one of the basest, most un-American promises of his campaign.
- Iran using missile power to defend citizens, hit terrorists: Zarif
- UK Parliament opening date set, suggesting Tory deal reached
- Burling, Kiwis beat Oracle third time in America's Cup
- Donnarumma will not renew Milan contract
- US congressman undergoes another operation after shooting
- Do You Own A 4K TV?
- Democrats stall Senate work to protest healthcare secrecy
- Cavs, Wolves Join Celtics In Jimmy Butler Trade Talks
- Escaped Inmates Held Terrified Couple Hostage Prior To Their Capture
- Wounded May soldiers on as election shock complicates Brexit