Middle-east Arab News Opinion | Asharq Al-awsat

Travel Ban Showdown Headed for Supreme Court after Appeals Court Ruling | ASHARQ AL-AWSAT English Archive 2005 -2017
Select Page
Media ID: 55375004

Passengers arrive at O’Hare airport in Chicago, Illinois, US February 4, 2017. REUTERS/Kamil Krzaczynski

A Virginia-based appeals court has set the stage for a showdown in the Supreme Court after refusing to reinstate US President Donald Trump’s travel ban on people from six Muslim-majority nations.

The decision, written by Chief Judge Roger Gregory, described Trump’s executive order in forceful terms, saying it uses “vague words of national security, but in context drips with religious intolerance, animus, and discrimination.”

But Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement that the government would seek a review of the case at the Supreme Court although he offered no timetable.

Sessions said the court’s ruling blocks Trump’s “efforts to strengthen this country’s national security.”

“These clearly are very dangerous times and we need every available tool at our disposal to prevent terrorists from entering the United States and committing acts of bloodshed and violence,” said Michael Short, a White House spokesman.

He added that the White House was confident the order would ultimately be upheld by the judiciary.

In its 10-3 ruling, the US 4th Circuit Court of Appeals said those challenging the ban, including refugee groups and individuals, were likely to succeed on their claim that the order violates the US Constitution’s bar against favoring one religion over another.

Gregory cited statements by Trump during the 2016 presidential election calling for a Muslim ban. During the race, Trump called for “a total and complete shutdown of Muslim’s entering the United States” in a statement on his website.

The judge wrote that a reasonable observer would likely conclude the order’s “primary purpose is to exclude persons from the United States on the basis of their religious beliefs.”

The government had argued that the court should not take into account Trump’s comments on the campaign trail since they occurred before he took office on Jan. 20. But the appeals court rejected that view, saying they provide a window into the motivations for Trump’s action in government.

The appeals court questioned a government argument that the president has wide authority to halt the entry of people to the United States.

“Congress granted the President broad power to deny entry to aliens, but that power is not absolute. It cannot go unchecked when, as here, the President wields it through an executive edict that stands to cause irreparable harm to individuals across this nation,” the majority opinion said.

The Vappeals court was reviewing a March ruling by Maryland-based federal judge Theodore Chuang that blocked part of Trump’s March 6 executive order barring people from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days while the government put in place stricter visa screening.

A similar ruling against Trump’s policy from a Hawaii-based federal judge is still in place. That ruling went farther than Chuang’s order, blocking a section of the travel ban that also suspended refugee admissions for four months. The San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals is still reviewing that decision.

Trump has lashed out at the judges and courts that have ruled against him.

The March ban was Trump’s second effort to implement travel restrictions through an executive order. The first, issued on Jan. 27, led to chaos and protests at airports before it was blocked by courts.

The second order was intended to overcome the legal issues posed by the original ban, but it was blocked by judges before it could go into effect on March 16.