In Victory for Trump, Supreme Court Dismisses Travel Ban Case

Marco Green
October 12, 2017

The decision effectively wipes the record clean in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, one of two federal appeals courts that had struck down major portions of Trump's travel ban. That executive order expires October 24, and it is likely the Supreme Court will also vacate that ruling. Last night, the high court ruled that the case against the travel ban is moot and vacated the lower court's judgment against the ban.

A separate case from the 9th Circuit, based in California, remains pending because it includes a ban on refugees worldwide that won't expire until later this month. That piece of the ban expires later this month.

The challenge that the Supreme Court dismissed on Tuesday, Trump v. International Refugee Assistance Project, originated from Maryland, and was brought against Trump by in part by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The order also affects a very small number of Venezuelan government officials and their families, but unlike its impact on Muslim-majority countries, it does not bar travel by anyone else in Venezuela. Victory for Trump admin.

The ruling Tuesday (Oct. 10) is a victory for the Trump administration, which had asked the court to drop the case after Trump signed a proclamation September 24 that replaced the temporary travel ban on six nations with a new, indefinite ban affecting eight countries.

The latest travel ban targets five countries included in two previous versions - Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen - as well as Chad, North Korea and Venezuela.

Hours before part of a version of the Trump administration's travel ban of six majority-Muslim countries was set to expire, officials rolled out the new version late September 24. Unlike the earlier bans, it treats some countries and types of travelers, such as students or tourists, differently than others.

For North Korea and Syria, Trump's order blocks immigrants wanting to relocate to the US and non-immigrants from visiting in some capacities.

Concerned about the safety of Texans, Attorney General Paxton stood alone last February when he filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in support of the initial travel ban.

The second case, Trump vs. Hawaii, is expected to be dismissed once the relevant refugee ban expires, according to multiple reports. His first was in January, issued via executive order.

Not only does the new travel ban suffer from some of the same legal flaws as previous versions, it is even more damaging because its restrictions have no end date and nearly entirely foreclose entry into the United States by nationals of the designated countries.

"President Trump's third attempt at a travel ban is still a Muslim Ban by another name - attempting to further the same discriminatory and unconstitutional goals as his first and second bans", said Attorney General Schneiderman. In a transparent attempt to mask the discriminatory and unlawful nature of the latest incarnation of the travel ban, the administration claims the designated countries were selected pursuant to objective analysis.

Other reports by Click Lancashire

Discuss This Article