SC permits parts of travel ban to take result
NEW YORK: American rights groups criticized the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to allow parts of President Donald Trump’s travel ban to be enforced on Tuesday.
On Monday, the court said it would hear the appeals of two cases that had resulted from the travel ban, which aimed to keep the citizens from six predominantly Muslim countries like Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen from entering the United States for 90 days and all refugees for 120 days.
The top court agreed to stay parts of rulings that had blocked the ban from being enforced. The partial stay means that foreigners with no U.S. ties could be prohibited from entering the country, but those with ties such as through business or personal relationship would remain unaffected, The New York Times reported.
Those who had been to the country previously also could enter.
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) Director of Immigrants’ rights project, Omar Jadwat, said, “The implication on the ground is actually not as severe, I think, as it might at first appear because the number of people who will be affected by this narrow version of the ban is much smaller.”
Jadwat noted, “I think it’s a complete mischaracterization to say that this is in some way a victory for the administration. What they’re being allowed to move forward with here is, is really the smallest sliver, the kind of faintest shadow of what they set out to originally accomplish.”
The Trump administration moved to take credit for the ruling, describing it as “a clear victory for our national security.”
The president in a statement said, “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.”
The court narrowed the scope of lower court rulings that blocked Trump’s Muslim ban from taking effect nationwide, and also agreed to hear the administration’s appeal in these cases.
US Attorney General Jeff Sessions defended the ruling, asserting that “Groups like ISIL (Daesh) and al-Qaeda seek to sow chaos and destruction in our country, and often operate from war-torn and failed countries.”
Meanwhile, arrivals from the six countries have already dropped sharply, in part thanks to the US authorities’ “extreme vetting” approach.
According to the New York Immigration Coalition, “agencies and individuals will struggle to make sense of” what the ruling means by “bona fide relationship.”
Trump’s original measure, issued by executive order in January, was almost immediately blocked by the courts, making the administration announce a revised version in March.
The nine justices are set to examine the case in full in October. The US State Department said it would implement the ruling in a “professional” manner.
State Department spokeswoman, Heather Nauert said in a statement, “We will keep those traveling to the United States and partners in the travel industry informed as we implement the order in a professional, organized, and timely way.”
she added, “We are also in contact with our partners in the implementation of the United States Refugee Admissions Programme, and will keep them apprised of changes as they take effect.”