U.S. Supreme Court Backs Trump Travel Ban Order


The U.S. Supreme Court has issued approval of President Donald Trump’s motion to implement a ban on refugees entering the country from all corners of the world.

Key points of the ban:

  • Relatives of Legal U.S. residents will be exempt from the travel ban.
  • Entry is allowed for refugees if they can prove that they have a formal offer from a settlement agency.
  • Amnesty international reports that some people will be caught in “limbo” as a result of the broad ban.

The justices of the U.S. Supreme Court granted a request from the Trump administration motion to block a Federal Appeals Court decision. According to the Justice Department, the Supreme Court decision will work to prevent the entry of 24,000 refugees to the country.

Pragmatically, the Supreme Court ruling gave Mr Trump a partial victory against the left-wing liberal states such as Hawaii which have rendered the motion unconstitutional. The U.S. High Court is currently in the midst of preparing for a key October hearing on the constitutionality of Mr Trump’s contentious executive order; motioning to ban travellers from 6 Muslim-dominated countries and hampered current refugee admissions.

The Trump administration’s exploitation of the current rise in protectionist ideals works to suspend travel for people from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for 90 days. The U.S. President justified the ban by arguing that the ban was necessary to prevent terrorist attacks and protect the country. However, one would query the legitimacy of such justification as most ‘terrorist’ attacks occurring in the U.S. and throughout the world were caused by nationals. The order works to narrow the scope of the lower court rulings to avoid the catchment of vulnerable people.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins of legal U.S. residents would be exempt from the travel ban. The Court of Appeals decided that Mr Trump’s refugee ban was too broad and allowed the entry of refugees from around the world if they could prove a formal offer was made to them by a settlement agency.

“The Supreme Court today has dealt yet another devastating blow to vulnerable people who were on the cusp of obtaining safety for themselves and their families,” said Naureen Shah, Amnesty International USA’s senior director.

The state of Hawaii, a strong opponent of the travel ban, has said that the executive order could still operate to “bar tens of thousands of refugees from entering the country” due to the broad term of “bona fide” in the order.

Despite being narrowed down to allow close relatives of U.S. legal residents and those with formal offers from settlement agencies, the executive order still permeates throughout the world to impact those in need of a new home. The ban works against the grain of world peace as it has induced a worldwide distaste towards American protectionist ideals working to exacerbate the current tensions of the world; namely ISIS and North Korean world threats.

Karen Cheung

Karen Cheung is a third year Commerce / Law student at the Australian National University. Her aim, as an OWP correspondent, is to challenge the status quo of resorting to destructive conduct. She wishes to inform individuals by providing them the necessary tools to think critically and offer peaceful solutions.
Karen Cheung

About Karen Cheung

Karen Cheung is a third year Commerce / Law student at the Australian National University. Her aim, as an OWP correspondent, is to challenge the status quo of resorting to destructive conduct. She wishes to inform individuals by providing them the necessary tools to think critically and offer peaceful solutions.