UPDATED: U.S. Supreme Court Lets Trump Travel Ban Take Full Effect

[DonViejo]

Last edited Mon Dec 4, 2017, 06:11 PM - Edit history (1)

Source: Bloomberg News




December 4, 2017, 4:15 PM EST

A divided U.S. Supreme Court let President Donald Trump’s travel ban take full effect while legal challenges go forward, handing him a major victory and suggesting the court ultimately will uphold the restrictions, Bloomberg News reports.

Trump will now be able to bar or restrict entry by people from six mostly Muslim countries, even if they have a relationship with a U.S.-based person or institution. The order effectively supersedes a compromise the justices reached in June, when they let an earlier version of the ban take partial effect but exempted people with a "bona fide" U.S. connection.

Developing...

Read more: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-04/u-s-supreme-court-lets-trump-travel-ban-take-full-effect-jasp2kia

---

UPDATE:

Supreme Court allows full enforcement of Trump travel ban while legal challenges continue

By Robert Barnes December 4 at 4:26 PM

The Supreme Court on Monday granted President Trump’s request that his revised travel ban be enforced fully while legal challenges to it proceed in lower courts.

The justices approved a request from the president’s lawyers to lift restrictions on the order — which bans most travelers from eight nations, most with Muslim majorities — that had been imposed by lower courts.

The court gave no reason for its decision, but said it expected lower court review of the executive orders to proceed quickly. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor would have kept in place partial stays on the order.

Judges in two judicial circuits — the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in Richmond and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in San Francisco — had cast doubt on Trump’s third executive order banning almost all travel from certain countries.

Oral arguments are scheduled for soon in both federal appeals court cases on whether the ban exceeds the president’s broad powers on immigration.

more
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-allows-full-enforcement-of-trump-travel-ban-while-legal-challenges-continue/2017/12/04/486549c0-d5fc-11e7-a986-d0a9770d9a3e_story.html

[OliverQ]

1. Sigh. Just seems like we can never get a break.

Gorsuch's stolen seat is going to hurt for a very long time.

[Freethinker65]

2. WTF

[Lurks Often]

3. The link states that it was a 7-2 decision, so it wasn't even close

[Botany]

4. Trying to ruin anything and everything before he is removed from power

God Damn Mitch McConnell for blocking Gorsch until the Russian fix was in.

We are no longer a democracy.

[johnnylol]

5. supreme court

7-2 decision in favor of the president ...

[Botany]

6. your concern is noted

поймите

[rockfordfile]

8. Why did you respond like that?

[Botany]

12. I don't know

холодные ночи и теплый суп свеклы делают тело наилучшим образом

[Glorfindel]

13. Good manners, probably.

The responder was too polite to let the original poster know that "the president" is not usually the way we refer to the tRump* monster in these parts. When he or she has been on DU a bit longer, the proper forms of address will become second nature.

[inwiththenew]

7. 7-2? Geeze they didn't even need Gorsuch

That is a pretty strong indicator of how the court will come down on this one. I hope I'm wrong though.

[ananda]

9. Wow!

I didn't think the more sane members would uphold it.

Geez!

[uppityperson]

10. Wasn't this supposed to be a temporary measure a yr ago to allow time to change vetting?

[SylviaD]

21. He wants it permanent. he will probably get his wish.

damn him and damn those "justices"

[bluestarone]

11. definite sign

of things to come

[PoliticAverse]

14. This is not at all surprising, based on previous Supreme Court decisions. n/t

[FBaggins]

18. True

With some fiddling around the edges, the real surprise was that we were able to find a few judges that would slow it down.

[geretogo]

15. Before this Tyrant is thrown out of office it will take longer for this country to rebuild from the

destruction than it took Europe to rebuild after WW2 . You can bank on it .

[Thor_MN]

16. WTF? The purpose of the ban was to gain time to study the issue.

What have they been doing in the meantime?

[FBaggins]

19. I think this is the post-study-it plan

I'm pretty sure these appeals relate to the replacement plan

[Igel]

23. It was.

But in getting the blanket injunction against implementation of the order, that also constituted an injunction against studying the vetting procedures.

Still, the injunction was lifted (partially, at least) long enough ago that the requested time for studying and proposing changes was up, IIRC, in Oct.

[Dalton Mac]

17. Breyer and Kagan voted with the Wingnuts

The hell???

[SylviaD]

20. This Supreme Court is a joke.

Can we IMPEACH a few of these "justices" while we IMPEACH Trump?

[chowder66]

22. I wonder if other countries will boycott the U.S. hitting tourism revenue hard. nt

[bucolic_frolic]

24. I think they feared a Tweetstorm

that could erode freedoms more than this did ... they might be right in the short run.

In the long run, the political tide will turn because we're going to turn it!

[Doreen]

25. NEXT

All of our "used to be true allies" will be banned. THEN, unless you can prove you have a shit load of money WE will start not being allowed to leave our country ( for any reason. ) The moment that fucking tax plan passed we became fucked over BIG time. It is a good thing Obama is not the one who said murder is illegal because trump would make sure it became legal. I myself have been given another reason to hate this country. No, I am not saying the people particularly all of you and like minded people but what this country itself is becoming and starting to represent. I am just prepared for death and enslavement.

[Stargazer99]

26. my words exactly

[turbinetree]

27. So this was a 7/2 decision?

What a fucked up country

[FBaggins]

28. It's actually almost certainly the right decision legally

The issue in this case is that Trump is using the power of the presidency poorly (that is... making the wrong decisions). It isn't (In this case) that the presidency doesn't have that particular power.