Questions Left by the Supreme Court's Travel Ban Ruling

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court granted the Trump administration two victories in connection with Executive Order No. 13780, "Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States", commonly known as the "Travel Ban".

The US Supreme Court on Monday partially reinstated Donald Trump's controversial travel ban targeting citizens from six predominantly Muslim countries, prompting the president to claim a victory for national security.

The court, however, granted the government's emergency request to put the presidential decree into effect immediately while the legal battle continues.

A 120-day ban on refugees is also being allowed to take effect on a limited basis.

But the court's ruling also underscores the view that Trump was overreaching when he banned all travel into the United States by certain refugees and foreign nationals from six countries.

"We anticipate the court will rule this is religious animosity - that this is discrimination against Muslims", Tara Rich, legal and policy director with the ACLU of Alaska, said. A senior US official familiar with the situation said the Trump administration has plans in place to relaunch the stalled ban and tourists will be among those kept out.

The Supreme Court lets almost all of Trump's policy be enforced as it hears his appeal.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel says she doesn't really do Twitter, but sometimes visits the site to check out what U.S. President Donald Trump has to say.

Courts "will struggle to determine what exactly constitutes a "bona fide relationship", who precisely has a "credible claim" to that relationship", Thomas said. The Trump administration had appealed to the Supreme Court.

"Courts have repeatedly blocked this indefensible and discriminatory ban", Jadwat said.

"President Trump's Muslim ban violates the fundamental constitutional principle that government can not favor or disfavor any one religion", Omar Jadwat, director of the group's immigrants' rights project, said. The court asked both sides to address the issue of timing, along with questions about whether the ban is aimed at Muslims, the impact of Trump's provocative campaign statements and federal courts' authority to restrain the president in the area of immigration.

But the Supreme Court said the government could enforce its measure against "foreign nationals unconnected to the United States" without causing injury to the parties who filed suit.

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. Similarly, the court stated that students who have been admitted to the University of Hawaii or a worker with an offer of employment from an American company would be exempt. In the meantime, the administration can bar travelers from six majority-Muslim countries from the US if they don't have a "credible claim of a bona fide relationship" with someone or some entity in the country.

Related news: