Politics

In Huge Legal Victory, SCOTUS Upholds Trump Travel Ban

supreme court list conservatives Gorsuch Trump travel legal SCOTUSOn Tuesday, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of upholding President Donald Trump’s travel ban, a major win for the Trump administration.

This monumental legal victory comes after months of the ban being demonized by political commentators and media outlets who repeatedly referred to it as “Islamophobic”, “un-American”, and a “disguise for xenophobia”.

In the majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the ban was “squarely within the scope of Presidential authority” under the Immigration and Nationality Act, allowing President Trump to exercise his responsibility to keep the nation safe.

The ban was set to be fully enforced in December 2017, however lower courts had ruled the policy to be legally out of bounds and had blocked parts of it from being enforced. Tuesday’s Supreme Court ruling has ensured that the policy will go into full effect, and clarifies that the ban will apply even to those with close relatives in the United States.

In a dissenting opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor opposed the bill, denouncing both the travel ban and the president himself. Sotomayor quotes statements candidate Donald Trump made during his presidential campaign about wanting to restrict Muslim immigration to the country, citing these claims as confirmation that the bill was based on religious bias, writing, “A reasonable observer would conclude that the Proclamation was motivated by anti-Muslim animus.

The ban, however, does not prohibit all Muslim immigration – in fact, it affects only eight percent of the world’s total Muslim population. President Trump’s ban was motivated not by Islamophobia, but by the need to increase national security. While five of the seven countries affected by the travel ban are majority-Muslim countries, this is based on the fact that these countries, like Syria and Iran, are run by fascist regimes who have sponsored acts of terrorism and repeatedly refused to cooperate with American requests to vet their travelers.

Roberts reiterates this point in the majority opinion, in which he cites 8 U.S. Code § 1182(f), which gives the president authority to restrict the entry of aliens if he thinks their entry “would be detrimental to the interests of the United States”.

The current version of the travel ban also applies to Venezuela and North Korea, two non-majority-Muslim countries.

President Trump celebrated the ruling on Tuesday, tweeting, “SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS TRUMP TRAVEL BAN. Wow!” He later hailed the decision in an official statement, saying, “This ruling is a moment of profound vindication following months of hysterical commentary from the media and Democratic politicians who refuse to do what it takes to secure our border and our country. […] The Supreme Court has upheld the clear authority of the president to defend the national security of the United States.”

 

 

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter
and Download the AMAC News App

Sign Up Today Download

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter!

Sign Up Today
Read more articles by Cole P. Zail
Subscribe
Notify of
16 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Thomas Haj
3 years ago

And now, with Justice Kennedy retiring, it all boils down to this – the makeup of the Senate will determine if a true conservative or another “go-along-to-get-along” moderate is picked (unless the vote is taken before this election, but we all know what the liberal media will do if that happens). The makeup of the Senate depends upon which side gets out and votes this year. It doesn’t get any more straight forward than that!

Pete from St Pete
3 years ago

It turns out that Sotomayor, whom the liberal press describes as a “wise Latina woman” is so blinded by her hate of Trump that she cannot make a common sense ruling on a cut and dried constitutionally conferred responsibility of the President. If all judicial decisions were to be based on the personal approval of each judge we might as well tear up the Constitution. Thank heaven Trump gets to pick another Supreme Court justice who pays attention to his or her oath when they take their pledge to obey the Constitution of the United States.

Phyllis Poole
3 years ago

Remember the Charades of long ago when the Muslims were trying to kill all Catholics. The Catholics got blamed for killing many Muslims but it was their acts that caused their killing. It was a war against all Christians AND today is no different. Their Quaran says to kill !!! And someone I know who said he lived as neighbor and worked with some, “don’t believe they wouldn’t kill you if they got the chance”! Do we want to invite the Charades into our country?! I will voice my opinion now that I believe Mohammed, their savior, was the devil himself. He certainly was anti God! I think when they pray to Allah, 2-3 times a day on their prayer mats, they are praying to the devil and do not know it! My opinion but think about it if they want to kill Christians and Christ was God!!!

r

PaulE
3 years ago
Reply to  Phyllis Poole

It was the Crusades during the high middle ages between the 11th and 13th centuries. Not the Charades.

Ivan Berry
3 years ago
Reply to  PaulE

And it’s five times daily. Ha.

Hen3ry
3 years ago

One does have to question the motives of those who opposed the travel ban
it made total sense for the purpose of national security

LINDA HART
3 years ago

HOORAY! Thank goodness for a better SCOTUS than we had 2 years ago. That it took so long to get this approval is absolutely ridiculous!!

Brian
3 years ago

It is NOT good for America when there are Islamic Supremacist enclaves in Dearborn MI and other moslem hotspots. Sharia Law cannot supercede Constitutional protections for anyone in the US. Even for young children in moslem families. Such as genital mutilations on young pre-teen girls and honor killings in teenagers and young adults. Do not let this cultural rot develop in our great nation to the point France and other European nations find themselves in with many “No Go” zones where the police are afraid to venture into. Winston Churchill made this observation: “How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism [Islam] lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.”

Paul W
3 years ago

While this is good news, it’s completely ridiculous that a matter that is totally within the purview of POTUS is even wasting time being adjudicated…by any court. The time has come to tell these lower courts to…pound salt…to be polite. Mr. Trump needs to start channeling his “inner Andrew Jackson”!

PaulE
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul W

Yes, it is completely absurd that so much time, effort and taxpayer dollars had to be spent to litigate a power that is clearly assigned to the POTUS under our constitution. Thankfully we currently have 5 judges on the SCOTUS that did their job properly and ruled on the law itself and NOT on the personal, political biases articulated by the likes of Sotomayor in the minority opinion. Hopefully now that Justice Kennedy has announced his retirement, the next Trump appointee to the SCOTUS will be quickly approved by thE Senate. That means Mitch McConnell has to “get it done!”

As for the federal appelate courts, it is well past time for the Republicans in Congress to do their jobs and impeach the federal judges that are consistently violating their oath to support and defend the Constitution. That is the mechanism setup in the Constitution to remddy the situation, by removing such judges from the bench. That means all these judges that consistently (9th Circuit Court of Appeals as an example) throw up legal roadblocks not based on the laws as written, but rather their personal and political views of what the law “should be” according to them. That is a pattern of legal malpractice and well within the bounds to justify the impeachment of any federal judge doing so.

Paul W
3 years ago
Reply to  PaulE

I agree with everything that you say. My problem is, other than the Freedom Caucus, I don’t trust Congress to do anything. They did nothing on replacing obamacare. They came up with that atrocious Omnibus bill and today they’re voting on a watered down, milk-toast immigration bill. They’re big government, globalists that couldn’t care less about what’s best for this country. I wouldn’t trust them to pass me the salt much less pass meaningful, conservative legislation.

PaulE
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul W

Agreed. I never meant to imply that the path forward would be either smooth or easy, but that there is a path, the only path actually, to remove these obstructionist judges on the federal bench. Aside from the Freedom Caucus in the House, most of the rest of the Republicans in Congress are either completely useless (incompetent at best, corrupt at worst) or actively working against President Trump and the American people to push the establishment agenda. Which is essentially open borders to change the demographics of the country to a more favorable population willing to be led without question, an unlimited stream of cheap, uneducated workers that crushes whatever opportunities exist for lower-skilled American citizens, and a move towards making the United States essentially a mirror image of any one of the failed socialist democracies that constitute the EU. That way, elections won’t matter and they can dispense with having to worry about being voted out of office, if enough of their constituents actually realize what a lousy job they are doing of representing them.

All that being said, the ONLY way to get these obstructionist federal judges off the bench is to elect a whole lot more real fiscal and constitutional conservatives to Congress. So the Freedom Caucus goes from a minority wing of the Republican Party to the majority of both houses of Congress. President Trump can only do so much alone, without any support from Congress. So the RINO’s and long-term dead weight old timers that have occupied Congress for decades have to be voted out and replaced by people willing to represent US, the productive, taxpaying citizens of this country. Until the majority of the American people get that through their thick skulls, nothing will change and in actuality will likely only get worse. The lousy representation we have today in Congress is a direct result of far too many people either being completely apathetic or voting simply for the familiar name on the ballot. You already know that, as your response indicates you’re well aware of the lousy record of this current Congress.

Sorry for being so frank, but there are a lot of people in this country today that think something magical will occur and everything will suddenly be wonderful. That they don’t bare any of the responsibility for the people they send repeatedly back to Congress, who do little to nothing to improve this nation. There are citizens of numerous nations around the world that would kill for half the freedoms many in this country take for granted and think can’t be taken away. President Trump is trying to educate the American people, in his own way, about what a totally lopsided set of deals our past three Presidents have given us and what those deals have resulted in. Yet many people don’t want to hear reality. They prefer to live in a dream world where we can make an unlimited number of bad choices and suffer no consequences.

Ivan Berry
3 years ago
Reply to  PaulE

And well said, PaulE. Would that more were listening.

Paul W
3 years ago
Reply to  PaulE

I agree 100% with everything that you said, PaulE. Far too many people in this country are far too apathetic or ignorant about what’s actually going on. Very troubling indeed.

Ivan Berry
3 years ago
Reply to  PaulE

Good behaviour is the only caveat given in Article III of the Constitution for allowing service, but the Congress in the same Article has the authority to establish ( and disestablish, one would presume–that which can be created can likewise be eliminated) lessor courts. The Congress is given power also to issue Regulations for the jurisdiction of the courts and what type of cases may be heard.
Impeachment should not be required for most corrections, but it does take a Congress with the moxy to do their job, and a public with enough knowledge to put into office those who will actually do what they were sent to do.

BajaRon
3 years ago

AWESOME! It took awhile for this to happen. But it’s always reason to celebrate when Good is victorious!

16
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x