MEANWHILE, INJUNCTIONS STAYED …
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) announced this week that it would hear arguments over president Donald Trump’s executive order temporarily suspending immigration from several mostly-Muslim nations.
More importantly, the high court determined that several injunctions issued by appellate courts effectively overturning Trump’s order were stayed until it ruled on the matter in October.
“We grant the government’s applications to stay the injunctions,” the court noted in announcing its decision to hear the case.
That’s a major victory for Trump – and it means that within seventy-two hours, entry into the United States by persons from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen will be suspended for a period of ninety days.
Only individuals with a “credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States” will be allowed entry into our country from those nations.
Trump issued his order back in January – arguing it was necessary to “protect the American people from terrorist attacks by foreign nationals admitted to the United States.”
“The visa-issuance process plays a crucial role in detecting individuals with terrorist ties and stopping them from entering the United States,” Trump wrote. ” Perhaps in no instance was that more apparent than the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, when State Department policy prevented consular officers from properly scrutinizing the visa applications of several of the 19 foreign nationals who went on to murder nearly 3,000 Americans.”
[timed-content-server show=”2017-Jun26 00:00:00 -0000″ hide=”2017-Jul-10 00:00:00 -0000″]Sponsored Content
[/timed-content-server]
Three of the more conservative justices on the court – Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch – argued that Trump’s ban should have been left completely in effect pending the court’s October ruling.
In a partial dissent authored by Thomas, the three conservative justices argued that the court erred in preserving any injunction “with regard to an unidentified, unnamed group of foreign nationals abroad.”
“No class has been certified, and neither party asks for the scope of relief that the Court today provides,” they wrote.
Here’s the court order (and partial dissent) …
[tnc-pdf-viewer-iframe file=”https://www.fitsnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/16-1436_l6hc.pdf” width=”533″ height=”800″ download=”true” print=”true” fullscreen=”true” share=”true” zoom=”true” open=”true” pagenav=”true” logo=”false” find=”true” language=”en-US” page=”” default_zoom=”auto” pagemode=””]
Limited government advocates praised the decision.
“We praise the Court for sticking to the actual four corners of the executive order by allowing the vast majority of the temporary travel ban to go back into effect,” said Rick Manning, president of Americans for Limited Government (GetLiberty.org). “This is a return to the rule of law, where the Supreme Court for now has refused to affirm lower court rulings that were not based on the actual laws and policies in question, but instead on political campaign rhetoric with no bearing on the actual case. For now, this is a huge victory not only for the Trump administration, but for the constitutional separation of powers.”
We agree …
We addressed Trump’s controversial order back in January, arguing in support of it. At the time, we focused on the unsustainable price tag associated with America’s perpetual open borders policy.
“As much as some might wish otherwise, America’s life boat is full,” we wrote at the time. “And America is broke – due in no small part to the ill-conceived global interventionism that has fueled the present refugee crisis.”
“So, we can leave our nation’s borders wide open if we want,” we added. “But doing so is a guarantee that those of us currently in the life boat will drown. And that’s before we even begin discussing the sort of people we might be helping into the boat.”
Obviously the latest round of terror attacks in Europe have underscored the national security arguments associated with Trump’s executive order.
UPDATE …
Trump has responded to the ruling, hailing it as “a clear victory for our national security.” Trump also said he was “gratified” that the ruling was unanimous.
Here is Trump’s statement in its entirety …
Today’s unanimous Supreme Court decision is a clear victory for our national security. It allows the travel suspension for the six terror-prone countries and the refugee suspension to become largely effective.
As President, I cannot allow people into our country who want to do us harm. I want people who can love the United States and all of its citizens, and who will be hardworking and productive.
My number one responsibility as Commander in Chief is to keep the American people safe. Today’s ruling allows me to use an important tool for protecting our Nation’s homeland. I am also particularly gratified that the Supreme Court’s decision was 9-0.
***
***
WANNA SOUND OFF?
Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our stories? In addition to our always lively comments section (below), please feel free to submit your own guest column or letter to the editor via-email HERE or via our tip-line HERE …
Banner via iStock