Trump Administration Asks Supreme Court to Reinstate Its Travel Ban

President Donald Trump

Trump Administration Asks Supreme Court to Reinstate Its Travel Ban

Five of the newly-restored nine justice Supreme Court roster must agree to hear the case, which normally would take months of preparation for oral argument.

In its filing, the government asked the top USA court to rule on the legal standing of Trump's order, appealing a ruling by the federal Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals that upheld a nationwide block of the travel ban. The appeals court ruled against reinstating the travel policy by a 10-3 vote last week.

The Justice Department argued that the lower courts were wrong were therefore wrong to apply the enforcement ban nationwide. The appeals court's May 25 opinion also faulted the White House for rushing out the first version without consulting with the national security agencies. However, the move was quickly shot down by two lower courts overturning Trump's order.

At issue is a ban Trump has said is necessary to protect Americans from terrorist attacks.

It also asked the Supreme Court to lift another US-wide injunction issued by a federal judge in a separate case based in Hawaii.

Muslims and Yemenis gathered with their supporters on the steps of Brooklyn's Borough Hall, during a protest against President Donald Trump's temporary travel ban on citizens from seven predominantly Muslim countries, Thursday, Feb. 2, 2017, in the Brooklyn borough of NY. So there's little upside to waiting for a ruling in hopes that it might be favorable and legally strengthen the administration's hand before the Supreme Court.

Virginia court of appeals ruled the President's executive order is likely unconstitutional over religious discrimination because of Trump's campaign trail statements that he wanted to keep Muslims out of the US.

Some observers (including members of the Trump administration) suspect that SCOTUS, particularly with Neil Gorsuch reestablishing a conservative majority on the Court, would answer both questions affirmatively - thus allowing the ban to go into effect.

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals called the national security concerns an after-the-fact justification for a policy that was 'intended to bar Muslims from this country'.

The Justice Department has filed two emergency applications arguing the ban on six mainly Muslim countries is necessary to keep the U.S. safe. It prevents the government not only from temporarily barring entry of residents of the six countries but also from conducting a broader review of visa security procedures that could lead to more countries getting blacklisted - and it stops the government from temporarily suspending refugee admissions from around the world.

Justice Department asks Supreme Court to...

The three dissenting judges zeroed in on the same issue to accuse their colleagues of overreach, by looking past the established authority and judicial precedent to Trump's statements about Muslims from the campaign, while he was still a private citizen.

In its brief, the Trump administration urged the court to place law above politics. Courts have historically been deferential in this area, and recent presidents including Carter, Reagan and Obama have used it to deny entry to certain refugees and diplomats, including from nations such as Iran, Cuba, and North Korea.

Oil Prices Rebound As EIA Reports Big Crude Draw
Private service, public viewing for Cornell planned Friday