facebooktwittertelegramwhatsapp
copy short urlprintemail
+ A
A -
webmaster

Reuters
WASHINGTON
Conservative US Supreme Court justices on Wednesday signaled they are likely to uphold President Donald Trump's travel ban targeting several Muslim-majority countries, one of the most contentious policies of his presidency.
Both Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Anthony Kennedy, a frequent swing vote on the conservative-majority, nine-member court, indicated unwillingness to second-guess the president on the national security justifications offered for the policy.
Trump has said the travel ban - the third version of a policy he first sought to implement a week after taking office in January 2017 - is needed to protect the United States from terrorism by Islamic militants. The current travel ban, announced in September, prohibits entry into the United States of most people from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen.
The challengers, led by the state of Hawaii, have argued the policy was motivated by Trump's enmity toward Muslims and that it violates federal immigration law and the U.S. Constitution's prohibition on the government favoring one religion over another.
Liberal justices indicated sympathy toward Hawaii's arguments.
But conservative Justice Samuel Alito said the text of Trump's proclamation announcing the ban"does not look at all like a Muslim ban."
Fellow conservative Roberts questioned whether the president could be restricted from taking action on foreign policy emergencies, such as the civil war in Syria, if he is prevented from targeting specific countries.
Kennedy, a conservative who sometimes joins the liberals in major rulings, pushed back on the notion pressed by the challengers that the ban was permanent, noting that the policy includes a requirement for ongoing reports that could potentially lead to the removal of a targeted country.
In an exchange with Hawaii's lawyer, Neal Katyal, Kennedy indicated it was not practical for a president to predict that six months after the ban was announced there will be a"safe world."
Trump's own conservative appointee to the court, Neil Gorsuch, suggested that the lawsuits challenging the ban brought by Hawaii and others should not have been considered by courts in the first place.
Referring to statements Trump made during his campaign for president such as calling for"a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,"Trump administration lawyer Noel Francisco said those should be off-limits for courts to scrutinize because he was not the president at the time.
In the first half of the argument, Kennedy did signal that courts should be able to review words from candidates from the campaign trail. Kennedy gave the example of a local mayor who makes discriminatory statements and then two days after taking office acts on them.
copy short url   Copy
26/04/2018
538