On January 27th, President Trump signed an executive order that banned entry for 90 days by citizens from seven Muslim nations.
The order was met with protests and fierce criticism.
Judges in New York and Massachusetts blocked parts of the order on January 28th and 29th. On January 30th, President Trump fired acting Attorney General Sally Yates after she refused to defend the travel ban.
US District Court Judge James Robart blocked the ban nationwide on February 3rd, just two days before the January 29th restraining order would have expired. On February 5th, a federal appeals court rejected the government’s request to resume the travel ban.
On March 6, the Trump Administration revealed a revised travel ban that removed Iraq from the original list of countries, removed the indefinite ban on Syrian refugees, and added language that ensured religious minorities would receive preference after the ban expired.
A US District Court Judge in Hawaii blocked the new travel ban on March 15th, just hours before it was set to begin. Trump called the ruling an “unprecedented judicial overreach” and threatened to take the matter to the Supreme Court.
On June 1st, the Trump Administration asked the Supreme Court to reconsider the revised travel ban.
Speaking for the Justice Department, spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores said Trump’s executive order is “well within his lawful authority to keep the nation safe and protect our communities from terrorism.”
“The president is not required to admit people from countries that sponsor or shelter terrorism, until he determines that they can be properly vetted and do not pose a security risk to the United States.”
In a 10-3 ruling, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals (in Richmond, Virginia) said the order “speaks with vague words of national security, but in context drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination.”
The Administration’s request marks the first time a Trump initiative will be put before the Supreme Court, and will give us insight as to how Chief Justice John Robert’s court will handle one of the nation’s most controversial presidents.
In the interim, Trump is asking SCOTUS to reinstate the travel ban. The ban would remain in effect for 90 days to give the government time to implement a more rigorous screening process.
Trump has also asked that SCOTUS hear arguments on an expedited basis so that the case can be argued in October.
The Supreme Court is expected to “set a schedule in the coming days for parties to the pending cases to weigh in on the federal government’s motions to allow the revised ban to take effect,” reports Politico. “Trump will need the votes of 5 justices to stay the lower court orders currently frustrating the administration’s efforts.” He will need the votes of 4 justices to add the case to the Supreme Court’s docket.
Author’s Note: A conservative majority was re-established in April when the Senate confirmed Trump’s nominee, Neil Gorsuch. Now that Trump has SCOTUS stacked in his favor, the court strategy becomes less effective. Judges do not like to be overturned, so finding liberal ones who want to take that chance will be tougher to do.
Editor’s Note: The damage done by the courts is irreparable. The point was to surprise the terrorists and deny them access to the U.S. when they were not prepared. The actions of the liberal courts have allowed the terrorists time to enter through the current inadequate system in preparation for attacks to come.