{"id":1644,"date":"2017-06-29T06:03:01","date_gmt":"2017-06-29T13:03:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/worldcampaign.net\/?p=1644"},"modified":"2017-06-29T06:03:50","modified_gmt":"2017-06-29T13:03:50","slug":"supreme-courts-travel-ban-decision-creates-new-confusion-justices-should-have-waited-to-weigh-the-full-case-in-the-fall-minneapolis-star-tribune","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worldcampaign.net\/?p=1644","title":{"rendered":"“Supreme Court’s travel ban decision creates new confusion: Justices should have waited to weigh the full case in the fall”, Minneapolis Star Tribune"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Editorial Board, June 28, 2017<\/p>\n

Monday\u2019s U.S. Supreme Court decision<\/a> to allow a limited version of President Donald Trump\u2019s travel ban to proceed until the court rules on the full case this fall was not a \u201cclear victory for our national security,\u201d as the president claimed in a triumphant tweet.<\/p>\n

Instead, it amplified a damaging message in the U.S. and abroad, undercutting efforts to counter violent extremism. The ban targets six mostly Muslim nations \u2014 Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. That fact betrays American values and quite possibly the Constitution itself \u2014 a conclusion the court may still reach when it eventually rules on the matter.<\/p>\n

In the meantime, the court\u2019s compromise to allow travel-ban exceptions for \u201cforeign nationals who have a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States\u201d is likely to prove problematic.<\/p>\n

Indeed, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, writing in dissent on behalf of himself and Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch, predicted complications when he wrote: \u201cI fear that the court\u2019s remedy will prove unworkable. Today\u2019s compromise will burden executive officials with the task of deciding \u2014 on peril of contempt \u2014 whether individuals from the six affected nations who wish to enter the United States have a sufficient connection to a person or entity in this country.\u201d Thomas predicted a \u201cflood of litigation\u201d in the wake of the order.<\/p>\n

Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch were arguing for an even less desirable outcome \u2014 implementation of the full ban until the court rules. If Monday\u2019s decision was a victory for Trump, who promised \u201ca total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States\u201d during the campaign, it was a narrow win.<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cIt\u2019s always been crystal clear that this policy was based on discrimination,\u201d said Amnesty International USA Executive Director Margaret Huang in a statement<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Further, \u201cthere is no reasonable national security justification for these measures,\u201d said Eric Schwartz<\/a>, former dean of the University of Minnesota\u2019s Humphrey School who is now president of Refugees International, in a statement. \u201cMore importantly, the suspension of refugee resettlement will impact the most vulnerable of the world\u2019s populations, including refugee women and girls, survivors of violence and torture, and refugee children, among many other groups at considerable risk.\u201d<\/p>\n

The fate of those groups is of great concern to the Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota<\/a>, said John Keller, the organization\u2019s executive director. \u201cWhat we\u2019ve seen is all of the courts \u2014 both district courts and courts of appeals \u2014 that have taken the necessary time to study it have seen it for what we believe it is, and that is an unconstitutional ban on individuals because of their faith, primarily, and not because of any sort of national security provable or tangible evidence the administration has put forward.\u201d<\/p>\n

No American who values national security would want anything short of thorough vetting for those coming to the U.S. But that system is in place, and the U.S. need not jettison its fundamental values by banning Muslims simply because of their faith.<\/p>\n

Minneapolis Star Tribune\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Editorial Board, June 28, 2017 Monday\u2019s U.S. Supreme Court decision to allow a limited version of President Donald Trump\u2019s travel ban to proceed until the court rules on the full case this fall was not a \u201cclear victory for our national security,\u201d as the president claimed in a triumphant tweet. Instead, it amplified a […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1001004,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[53],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldcampaign.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1644"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldcampaign.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldcampaign.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worldcampaign.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1001004"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worldcampaign.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1644"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/worldcampaign.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1644\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1646,"href":"https:\/\/worldcampaign.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1644\/revisions\/1646"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldcampaign.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1644"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worldcampaign.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1644"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worldcampaign.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1644"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}