Earlier this morning, the Supreme Court ruled to uphold President Trump’s September executive order that restricted travel to the U.S. from several countries. This executive order garnered significant controversy, with critics arguing it was motivated by religious hostility, as evidenced by the fact that it applied to citizens of Muslim majority countries. Numerous legal challenges to the executive order ultimately reached the Supreme Court in Trump v. Hawaii. The Supreme Court upheld the restriction as falling within the president’s authority and rejected the idea that the restriction was based on religious hostility.
Chief Justice Roberts wrote the 5-4 opinion. The Court determined that the travel restriction was within the president’s constitutional authority. The opinion held that the order was based on legitimate purposes, such as preventing the entry of people who cannot be properly vetted and encouraging other countries to improve their vetting process. The opinion also stated that the text did not mention religion and the fact that it applied to five countries with Muslim majority populations did not inherently demonstrate religious hostility.
Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan dissented.
Berardi Immigration Law is committed to providing our clients with the most accurate and up-to-date immigration news. Be sure to frequently check our blog for the latest updates!
