After a 5-to-4 ruling on Tuesday, June 26th, 2018, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the travel ban implemented by President Trump. The ban prevents travel from a few predominantly Muslim countries. It will allow him to prohibit travelers from certain countries if he deems it necessary to protect the United States. This ruling provided the president with a political victory during a time of great political upheaval regarding immigration control and the treatment of migrants along the Mexican border.
A majority of conservatives backed the ruling, and Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing on behalf of the conservative majority, determined that statements made by Mr. Trump did not inhibit the president’s ability to utilize his power of control of entry into the United States. Additionally, Roberts noted that “The Proclamation is squarely within the scope of Presidential authority.”
This ruling came after three prior attempts to enforce the travel ban was denied by the Supreme Court. After each decision, the president and his team strengthened the order to be successful in its implementation. There was hope this revision would be successful, as the ban was able to go into effect while the justices reviewed and considered the challenges to it.
The ban issued last fall prevented travelers from Syria, Yemen, Libya, Iran, Chad, Venezuela, and North Korea. This challenge did not include restrictions on Venezuela and North Korea, and the ban from Chad was later lifted after determining the country met security requirements.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor felt that the court should not have dismissed the president’s statements and comments regarding Muslims, however. She wrote, “The majority here completely sets aside the President’s charged statements about Muslims as irrelevant.” Sotomayor argued that the opinions were similar to that of one made in 1944, in which the court confined Japanese-Americans during World War II. In response to this, Roberts declared that the case in 1944 was wrongly decided and is no longer validated as good law. This statement just so happened to be the first time that the Supreme Court made this decision public.