Supreme Court docket agrees to take up Trump's journey ban

Share

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear President Donald Trump's appeal of a decision that he overstepped his authority by restricting entry into this country for people from six mostly Muslim countries. It urged the justices to take on the case immediately, telling them that the district court's "unprecedented order requires the government to sanction indefinitely an ongoing violation of federal law being committed by almost 700,000 aliens-and, indeed, to confer on them affirmative benefits (including work authorization) pursuant to the DACA policy".

The request for review by the Supreme Court is unusual because an appellate court has yet to rule on U.S. District Judge William Alsup's January 9 preliminary injunction.

On Friday, Dec. 22, 2017, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the President violated federal law and exceeded his authority in issuing travel ban 3.0.

Samsung Patent Potentially Solves The iPhone X's Notch Design Issue
On the other side, Galaxy S9 + will launch with a dual camera setup with two 12-megapixel cameras with f/1.5 and f/2.4 cameras. Some current speculations also claim that Samsung's new rear camera will be able to shoot at 1,000 frames per second.

If the high court endorses the government's "staggering and limitless" view of the president's power, Katyal warned, the president "could end the family-preference system, revive the national origin quotas Congress abolished a half century ago", or "shut the borders entirely based on nothing more than his view that the country admits too many foreign nationals". Before the Supreme Court's December order, the lower courts also had allowed the ban to go into effect for those with no close relatives in the United States or "formal, documented" relationships with US-based entities such as universities and resettlement agencies. Instead, the president's third proclamation, issued in September, denies entry indefinitely to most travelers from Chad, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Yemen and North Korea as well as some government officials from Venezuela.

By accepting review at this point in the Court's term, the Justices gave themselves the opportunity to issue a final decision before the current term ends, probably in late June.

Trump tweaked the order after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit refused to reinstate the ban. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented from that decision.

Public reposal to take place in Limerick today for Dolores O'Riordan
Officials said they are awaiting the results of "various tests", and the hearing was adjourned until April 3rd. O'Riordan and her former husband Don Burton had three children together.

This is the third iteration of the so-called travel ban; similar orders from the administration also faced legal challenges, but ultimately ended up expiring or being replaced before SCOTUS could hear those challenges. Pro-immigration groups that have sued to stop the order say it is discriminatory and amounts to a ban on Muslims.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D), who filed one of the federal lawsuits that led to the temporary injunction, said Tuesday he was confident that the higher courts will uphold the judge's order. Furthermore, the President has repeatedly explained that the two orders pursue the same aim.

A picture of health? Trump to share details of medical checkup
With tax reform , Trump continues to chip away at Obamacare, eliminating the health insurance mandate penalty in 2019. His mother died at 88 and his father lived to 93, though he suffered from Alzheimer's disease for about five years.

Share