Trump changes travel ban expiration date ahead of high court decision

  • Trump changes travel ban expiration date ahead of high court decision

Trump changes travel ban expiration date ahead of high court decision

The White House said it is confident the high court will uphold Trump's executive order.

The president's travel ban, first issued in January, and a revised order from March have been in legal limbo after federal judges put them on hold and appeals courts have upheld those rulings. The Hawaii judge also blocked a 120-day ban on refugees entering the United States. The ruling Monday says the president violated USA immigration law.

"And yet again, these revisions underline that the one thing the president has consistently wanted throughout is a Muslim ban", he added. However, the administrative ease with which President Trump issued this memorandum also shows that we would always be on the precipice of a permanent or otherwise capricious immigration executive order extended to more countries for dubious reasons over an indefinite period of time.

Other changes: travelers from the affected countries who are legal permanent residents of the United States, dual nationals who use a passport from another country and those who have been granted asylum or refugee status are exempt from the new order.

"So remember, it was Obama who actually made this list, and it wasn't a problem until Democratic attorneys general started suing in the 9th and 4th circuits" to stop Trump from expanding the restriction to become a temporary pause, instead of a normal visa application process, he said. The 9th Circuit found that the president's order failed to "tie these nationals in any way to terrorist organizations within the six designated countries".

Because of the conflict with immigration law, the judges said they didn't need to consider whether it also violated the Constitution's prohibition on the government favoring or disfavoring any religion. The 4 circuit chose a different path for its ruling.

In its reply briefs submitted to the Supreme Court, the government argued that the "clarification forecloses respondents' mootness argument" and asked the Supreme Court to stay the Maryland and Hawaii injunctions, and grant a writ of certiorari to take the case.

Federal statute specifically authorizes the president to "suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions which may deem to be appropriate", he said. The 9th Circuit said he was required to consult with Congress in setting the number of refugees allowed into the country in a given year and that he could not decrease it midyear. By lifting the part of Judge Watson's injunction that barred the review of internal vetting procedures, the 9 Circuit may have ensured that the case will be moot by the time it is argued, no matter how the 90 days are calculated. Because he issued the ban back in March, those 90 days are up this week.