Supreme Court upholds the Trump Travel Ban

The Supreme Court's 5-4 decision upholding the Travel Ban is the correct decision. It is actually disappointing that the decision was so narrow. Federal law is pretty clear on this: the President of the United States can prevent a group of foreigners from entering our country for any reason he deems fit in national interest. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, Refugee Act of 1980, and federal statutory code 8 U.S.C. 1182 f, all affirm this principle. The President possesses the sole authority to make that decision, no matter how flawed his reasoning may be. The fact that Trump made asinine comments during the campaign does not diminish his presidential power nor does it address the constitutionality of the executive order itself. It is also clearly NOT a Muslim ban, as the order never mentions religion, and 85% of the Islamic world is not affected by the ban. Even non-Muslims from countries on the ban are included.

Many on the Left are comparing this decision to the infamous 1942 Korematsu ruling. That is an absurd analogy. In Korematsu, the Court affirmed the federal government's power to forcefully intern (without due process or trial) U.S. citizens and legal residents of Japanese descent. The Travel Ban is simply placing a temporary hold on foreigners from certain countries from entering.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/26/supreme-court-rule...

Comments (5)

Jun 26, 2018

Setting aside the Constitutional legality, my thoughts as a libertarian:

What's in our national interest of a blanket travel ban, and why now? Surely there are some people from each of the countries on the list that we would accept as visitors. Feel free to vet travelers and immigrants as thoroughly as necessary / possible - that's well within our rights and common-sense - but this application just seems sloppy and imprecise. What prompted this specific timing and if it is indeed temporary, under what set of circumstances will it end?

    • 1
    • 1
Jun 26, 2018

Well since it only covers like 9% of the Muslim population and only from countries deemed to have people that might not agree with the way the US does thing (or our national ideals), I'm fine with it. Obama thought those countries needed it, and so does this administration. I don't agree with Obama on much, but I will this time.

Consider the last administration did the exact same thing, if I were you, I'd go research the topic. This isn't the first time this has happened.

Funniest
Jun 26, 2018

MAGA

    • 3
    • 5
Jun 26, 2018

I really feel like the ban is more to make people feel safe than actually make people safe. We have enough violence from Americans that needs to be dealt with. To me, it's pandering

    • 1
Most Helpful
Jun 26, 2018
Comment
    • 3
    • 5