Trump hailed the court's order as a "clear victory for our national security", especially after lower court rulings that blocked the travel ban in its entirety. This will affect people in six Muslim populated countries: Iran, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen.
Until then, people entering the United States from one of the six countries "who lack any bona fide relationship with a person or entity" in the country will remain barred.
In a statement issued soon after the court's decision, Trump said: "Today's unanimous Supreme Court decision is a clear victory for our national security". Specifically, the Court's decision allows the travel ban to go into effect for the above-mentioned foreign nationals, but only if they lack any "bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States". District Judge Mark Goldsmith requested the lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union and other immigrant rights advocates to expand his order nationwide in order to prevent Immigration and Customs Enforcement in the deportation of Iraqi nationals. They say even allowing parts of the ban to take effect is not fair.
The Supreme Court decided Monday to reinstate certain parts of the president's controversial executive order, pending a full review by the justices this fall.
But by then, legal experts predict, the case could be moot because the 90 day six-country ban and the 120-day refugee ban will have run their courses. Refugees who have some connection to the United States may not be summarily blocked from entry; those who have no connection to the United States may be blocked from entry.
The court goes on to define relationships that would qualify: for individuals, a family relationship; for students, admittance to a college or university; for workers, a job offer.
Al-Hashedi said she isn't sure what that means or how to prove close ties - she has cousins in the USA but no documentation to prove they are related.Читайте также: Comedian Leslie Jones tweets The Ritz-Carlton Los Angeles is racist
"This is a complete defeat for the extremists on the other side", he said, "including some of the other courts who stuck the whole thing down and didn't bother to think about whether people who have no contact with the USA even have the right to raise this".
"If a person does not have a valid visa and has applied for one", he says, "what we have heard is that the process of obtaining a new visa has slowed significantly".
By the time the court has scheduled to take up the case in October, the issue should be moot. But Malik says it's disappointing for refugees who have been waiting for years to come to the United States.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions says the Justice Department looks forward to defending the travel ban when the Supreme Court hears arguments in the case in October.
Among those likely to take legal action are refugee support networks, like the International Refugee Assistance Project, which is already a party to the Supreme Court's case.
The high court will now decide whether applying Colorado's public accommodations law to compel the baker to create "expression"- a wedding cake - violates his constitutionally protected Christian beliefs about marriage.При любом использовании материалов сайта и дочерних проектов, гиперссылка на обязательна.
«» 2007 - 2017 Copyright.
Автоматизированное извлечение информации сайта запрещено.
Код для вставки в блог