Trump delays effective date of travel ban amid court battle

Adjust Comment Print

The injunctions blocking the ban were upheld on appeal. Still, junior justice Neil Gorsuch's investiture ceremony tomorrow (June 15) could be awkward.

ABC News reported President Donald Trump's administration submitted briefs to the Supreme Court indicating the memo's "clarification forecloses respondents' mootness argument". It's his first visit there as president.

Make no mistake, we agree with the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling in a case that originated in Maryland finding a direct line between President Trump's blatantly anti-Muslim campaign trail statements and his administration's bans against travel from certain Muslim nations.

The court's processing of the Trump Administration's appeals in the two cases has been slowed down a bit because one of the lower court decisions it is now being asked to review just came out on Monday, when the other case was almost finished with the filing of briefs.

Amazon's $14-Billion Grocery Deal a 'Threat' to Food Retailers
The Bentonville, Ark. -based retailer announced Friday that it had agreed to buy online clothing company Bonobos for $310 million. However, Wal-Mart has still been able to build over 4,600 Wal-Mart and Sam's Club locations.

The Virginia court ruled that the 90-day suspension of visas for citizens of Iran, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Sudan, and Somalia, signed by Trump on March 6, was unconstitutional because it discriminated against Muslims. Of course, the Trump administration, which has appealed the case up to the U.S. Supreme Court, does not want that to happen.

Challengers to the ban, who say the order is meant to discriminate against Muslims, have said in court papers that it should expire on Wednesday, 90 days after the executive order was due to take effect on 16 March. The Ninth Circuit decision also notes that courts should avoid making decisions on constitutional grounds when there's an alternative basis for a ruling. The DOJ also will get one day after that to file a reply to those response briefs.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday afternoon ordered a new round of legal briefs in the controversy over President Trump's executive order seeking to impose new immigration restrictions, giving itself the option of considering on June 22 what to do with the two cases before it.

An executive order can not be divorced from its intent, and if the motivation behind it wasn't sufficiently clear before, Trump's recent tweetstorm of complaints about the "politically correct" version of the travel ban the Justice Department crafted (at his behest) after the initial version was struck down confirms that his intent hasn't changed.

Comments