Supreme Court to review Trump travel ban, allows part to go into - wave3.com-Louisville News, Weather & Sports

Supreme Court to review Trump travel ban, allows part to go into effect

Trump's travel bans have been blocked by the courts, at least in part, based on his campaign pledge to block all Muslims from entering the country. (Source: CNN) Trump's travel bans have been blocked by the courts, at least in part, based on his campaign pledge to block all Muslims from entering the country. (Source: CNN)
The Supreme Court is allowing President Donald Trump's executive order to put a 90-day ban on people coming to the U.S. from six majority-Muslim countries, overturning lower court rulings. (Source: White House/CNN) The Supreme Court is allowing President Donald Trump's executive order to put a 90-day ban on people coming to the U.S. from six majority-Muslim countries, overturning lower court rulings. (Source: White House/CNN)

(RNN) - The U.S. Supreme Court announced Monday it would review President Donald Trump's revised travel ban of six Muslim-majority countries. 

The court is allowing the 90-day ban on people coming to the U.S. from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen, overturning lower court rulings that blocked it. Trump has said the ban would go into effect 72 hours after the ruling. The justices are expected to hear the case in October.

The court left one group protected - foreign nationals with "credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States." The opinion was unsigned. 

"Today’s unanimous Supreme Court decision is a clear victory for our national security," said Trump in a statement. "It allows the travel suspension for the six terror-prone countries and the refugee suspension to become largely effective. As President, I cannot allow people into our country who want to do us harm. I want people who can love the United States and all of its citizens, and who will be hardworking and productive."

Three conservative justices, Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, gave a dissenting opinion, arguing the full ban should be put in place. Thomas said he had concerns that the court's solution would prove unworkable.

The two versions of the travel ban have been blocked by the courts, at least in part, based on Trump's campaign pledge to block all Muslims from entering the country. His administration has argued the ban is in the interest of national security and needed to have an internal review of screening procedures for people from the countries in question.

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stated the action of the second executive order was "rooted in religious animus" and intended to bar Muslims. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the travel ban did not comply with federal immigration law.

Trump has criticized the judges and courts that ruled against the order, including making the misleading statement that close to 80 percent of the 9th Circuit's rulings are overturned.

He also rebuffed attempts by his own team to get the order called something other than a "ban."

"People, the lawyers and the courts can call it whatever they want, but I am calling it what we need and what it is, a TRAVEL BAN!," Trump tweeted June 5. " The Justice Dept. should have stayed with the original travel ban, not the watered down, politically correct version they submitted to (the Supreme Court)."

The second executive order, issued in March, revised the first to remove Iraq from the countries affected. It also explicitly exempted residents and visa holders, and it removed language of preferential treatment to religious minorities of the majority-Muslim nations.

The first executive order, signed Jan. 27, was meant to be in effect for 90 days, halt refugees for 120 days and banned refugees from Syria indefinitely.

The ban went into effect immediately, causing chaos for the Department of Homeland Security, who had not been given guidance on how to implement it. Green card holders and other people legally allowed to travel were detained, and protests took place at airports across the country.

A federal judge in Washington ruled against the ban, and that ruling was upheld by the 9th Circuit.

Copyright 2017 Raycom News Network. All rights reserved.

Powered by Frankly