On September 12, the Supreme Court released a handful of orders. One of which, a stay on the 9th Circuit’s ruling on President Trump’s travel ban, sides with President Donald J. Trump in overruling the appeals court’s narrow reading of his January travel ban.
As originally proposed, the 90-day ban encompasses seven majority Muslim nations, and includes a 120-day suspension of the State Department’s U.S. Refugee Admissions Program. Days after the ban was enacted, emergency stay applications were filed by multiple groups, including the state of Hawaii and the ACLU. The various cases quickly traveled up the federal court of appeals into their centralized location within the common case of Trump v. Hawaii.
In the wake of the ruling, the legal debate continues to swirl around what conditions would qualify a refugee as having a “bona fide” connection to the United States, thus earning them admittance into the country.
Tuesday’s order comes amid national protests after the Trump administration announced its intentions to end the Obama era directive entitled Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). Many states responded to this announcement by declaring to file suit against the rollback.
This indicates that, as the administration continues to push far-right immigration policies to the center of American discourse, they are likely to experience more challenge in both the Supreme Court and in the court of public opinion. Another indication pertains to the nine Supreme Court justices who, despite the heated and partisan debate on immigration, have now demonstrated a willingness to leave action on immigration up to the Executive branch.
While they still may not rule in full favor of Trump’s travel ban, the Supreme Court’s most recent ruling does little to quell concerns during a tumultuous time in the nation’s capitol.
Now, heading into a possible landmark term, the Supreme Court is hearing cases ranging in importance from political gerrymandering to wedding cakes. Meanwhile, a central campaign promise remains on the line for the Trump administration, and human livelihoods hang in the balance.