This thread is permanently archived
Supreme Court upholds travel ban
| US code ยง1182. The basis used by the plaintiffs to suggest the President's reasons for implementing the ban are suspect & thus subject to judicial inquiry, despite statutes & legal precedent to the contrary, Trump's proclamation is supported by a wealth of data & precedent whereas the plaitiff's arguments are predicated largely upon the administation's rhetoric.
Furthermore, under the plaintiff's reading of the statutes the President would be deprived even of the power to...
| restrict travel from nations affected by pandemics or with which the US was on the brink of war.
Furthermore, the exceptions permitted for relatives of persons already in the US contravenes the plaintiffs' argument that they are being injured by the ban & have right to redress under the Establishment clause.
https://www.lawfareblog.com/document-supreme-court-upholds-travel-ban-hawaii-v-trump
| Citation is scan & text of the Court's opinion.
| Also, apologies for all the 'furthermore.' I'm afraid I've been reading & writing legal text far too long.
This thread is permanently archived
| The 5-4 opinion was that, through processes of reviewing which nations collect & supply what degree of information on their nationals upon request from immigration officials, & reference to previous designations of all the affected nations as threats to national security by Congress & previous administrations, the administration has firmly demonstated that the ban is in the interest of national security.
Furthermore, the ban is well within the president's competencies under...