BREAKING NEWS : Forrmer Minneapolis police officer who knelt on George Floyd has been arrested Full Story

Supreme Court hearing arguments over travel ban

The Supreme Court is listening to arguments over the third version of President Trump's controversial travel ban that limits immigration from seven majority-Muslim countries.

Posted: Apr 25, 2018 11:27 PM
Updated: Apr 25, 2018 11:30 PM

Conservative justices and swing vote Justice Anthony Kennedy appeared to side with the Trump administration Wednesday as the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on President Donald Trump's travel ban.

More than a year after Trump caused chaos in the airports by following through on a campaign promise and restricting travel from several Muslim-majority countries, the justices considered the legality of a third version of the original travel ban to decide whether the President ultimately exceeded his authority.

Coming out of oral arguments, the justices wrestled with the travel ban, at times breaking down on ideological lines.

Kennedy's vote could be key, and while he did express some reservation about a candidate's expressions of animus against Muslims during the campaign, he didn't seem to have overall concerns about the President's authority to ban entry, noting that the travel ban could be reviewed every 180 days. Other justices, including Chief Justice John Roberts and Samuel Alito, also highlighted the President's power in this area.

The Trump administration argued forcefully in favor of the travel ban, with Solicitor General Noel Francisco emphasizing "this is not a so-called 'Muslim ban.'"

"It excludes the vast majority of the Muslim world," he told the justices, saying the presidential order was based on neutral criteria and written "after a worldwide multi-agency review."

Alito also noted that the ban only impacts a handful of Muslim-majority countries, at one point stating this does "not look like a Muslim ban."

As Francisco took the podium, liberal justices pounced on the scope of the ban, its indefinite nature and whether it exceeded the President's authority.

Pressed by Justice Sonia Sotomayor about where the President "gets the authority to do more" than what Congress already decided, Francisco said it's up to the executive branch to "set up, to maintain and to constantly improve" the screening system.

Liberal Justice Elena Kagan brought up a hypothetical: what if a president gave strong anti-Semitic statements during his campaign and then issued a proclamation saying no one from Israel could enter the country. She asked if those statements wouldn't be relevant and indicate animus.

Kennedy offered his own hypothetical concern about a candidate who might express hateful statements, and then "takes acts that are consistent with those hateful statements."

"Whatever he said in his campaign is irrelevant?" he asked.

Later, critically, when Neal Katyal, arguing for Hawaii against the ban, came to the podium, Kennedy seemed to express more sympathy for Trump's position. He noted that the travel ban could be examined every 180 days.

And Kennedy asked with skepticism whether the courts should be second guessing the political branches when it comes to national security.

"Your argument is," he said, "that courts have the duty to review whether or not there is such a national contingency -- that's for the courts to do, not the President?" he asked Katyal.

Roberts stressed the White House's national security concerns and asked whether "any type of targeted action" that might impact the Muslim population would give rise to claims of discrimination.

At the end of arguments, Katyal told the justices that if the President disavowed all of his statements, he wouldn't have an issue here.

Katyal told the justices that he told the 9th Circuit exactly that but the President hasn't done that.

Francisco said at the end that Trump has stated this is not a Muslim ban and pointed to specific statements from September 25.

"He has made crystal clear that Muslims in this country are great Americans and there are many, many Muslim countries who love this country and he has praised Islam as one of the great countries of the world," Francisco said.

Ahead of the hearing, a handful of protesters rallied outside the court, holding signs that read "No Muslim Ban Ever," "We will stand together" and "Come for one, face us all."

Several speakers -- including Nihad Awad, the national executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations -- also addressed the crowd outside.

"This Constitution, he thinks it's a toy to be played with and to be thrown away when he's bored with its protections," Awad said.

After various iterations of the ban ricocheted through the courts, the Supreme Court agreed last December to allow travel ban 3.0 to go entirely into effect pending appeal.

RELATED: Conservatives exert new control over Supreme Court

The version of the ban before the court, signed in September, came after the administration completed a worldwide review as to the vetting procedures of several countries. The ban restricts the entry of noncitizens from seven countries to varying degrees: Iran, North Korea, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Venezuela. (Chad has been removed from the list, which Francisco also noted during the hearing)

In court briefs, Katyal relied on a "litany" of statements that Trump made during the campaign and afterward concerning a restriction of Muslims entering the United States and notes that even though the current proclamation was crafted after a review of the entry policies of other governments, it is a "direct descendant of previous bans" covering many of the same countries.

His brief includes some of the President's statements on the campaign trail calling for a "Muslim ban" as well as a retweet of three anti-Muslim propaganda videos he sent on November 29, 2017.

Strong message from court

Both sides say that if the court greenlights the ban it will send a strong message for other presidents and could shed light on how courts should consider statements a president makes during a campaign or on his Twitter feed.

"Nobody denies that the president wields extraordinary power over immigration and national security," said Joshua Matz, who sided with the challengers in a brief filed on behalf of constitutional scholars. "What's at stake here is the president's ability to evade any legal consequence for his own public statements, including those broadcast on a global stage."

Joshua A. Geltzer of Georgetown Law, who also opposes the ban, says the case is about the office of the president, not any one president. "It's about whether our federal courts have a meaningful role to play in enforcing the limits of those authorities, or whether -- as the government argues here -- the courts simply shouldn't be looking at this at all," he said.

Josh Blackman, a law professor at the South Texas College of Law in Houston, believes the justices will find that the travel ban passes legal muster.

"If the court upholds the travel ban on statutory grounds, it will signal that Congress has for decades vested the president with the flexibility to respond to an unforeseeable national security dynamic," he said.

Blackman thinks the court will find that the President has his own inherent constitutional authority to exclude noncitizens and the justices won't hold campaign statements against the President.

"If the Supreme Court rules that the President's actions can be halted based on his campaign statements, courts will be drawn into the unenviable position of serving as fact-checkers for the executive branch," he said.

Indiana Coronavirus Cases

Data is updated nightly.

Confirmed Cases: 33068

Reported Deaths: 2068
CountyConfirmedDeaths
Marion9524558
Lake3494175
Cass15897
Allen141966
St. Joseph122134
Hendricks114268
Hamilton113292
Elkhart110128
Johnson1092106
Madison58459
Porter50522
Bartholomew49034
Clark47941
LaPorte42022
Tippecanoe3823
Howard37824
Delaware37636
Jackson3721
Shelby36822
Hancock32727
Floyd31739
Boone30535
Morgan27724
Vanderburgh2592
Montgomery23417
White2308
Decatur22431
Clinton2221
Noble20421
Grant19721
Dubois1903
Harrison18921
Henry16910
Greene16824
Monroe16512
Warrick16528
Dearborn16521
Vigo1538
Lawrence15223
Miami1401
Putnam1357
Jennings1294
Orange12422
Scott1203
Ripley1106
Franklin1098
Kosciusko1011
Carroll933
Daviess8416
Steuben812
Marshall801
Newton7610
Wayne756
Fayette747
Wabash742
LaGrange682
Jasper661
Washington511
Jay490
Fulton471
Clay461
Rush452
Randolph453
Jefferson431
Pulaski410
Whitley383
Owen351
Sullivan341
DeKalb331
Brown331
Starke323
Perry280
Wells270
Benton260
Huntington262
Knox250
Tipton241
Crawford230
Blackford222
Parke190
Spencer191
Switzerland190
Fountain182
Posey160
Gibson142
Adams131
Ohio130
Warren121
Vermillion100
Martin90
Union80
Pike60
Unassigned0161

Ohio Coronavirus Cases

Data is updated nightly.

Confirmed Cases: 33915

Reported Deaths: 2098
CountyConfirmedDeaths
Franklin5566253
Cuyahoga4211226
Marion264225
Hamilton2555135
Lucas2178240
Pickaway204836
Mahoning1397173
Summit1335172
Butler84728
Stark70591
Columbiana68451
Lorain66759
Montgomery63717
Trumbull55147
Belmont41212
Miami35230
Warren35119
Tuscarawas3373
Ashtabula32434
Portage31857
Medina31322
Delaware31013
Lake29012
Wood28246
Geauga27231
Wayne26049
Fairfield2515
Clark2345
Licking22210
Allen20632
Clermont2025
Mercer2016
Richland1933
Erie1656
Darke16221
Madison1487
Washington11819
Crawford1103
Morrow1041
Greene1015
Ottawa9312
Putnam8814
Monroe7512
Sandusky7211
Hocking694
Ross672
Jefferson662
Auglaize653
Huron561
Williams511
Hancock512
Union491
Muskingum480
Clinton430
Hardin420
Shelby403
Fayette390
Wyandot382
Logan370
Fulton370
Coshocton370
Guernsey340
Defiance332
Preble331
Carroll303
Lawrence290
Holmes291
Brown281
Champaign271
Knox231
Highland221
Seneca202
Vinton192
Ashland190
Athens181
Perry181
Henry150
Scioto150
Jackson130
Paulding130
Harrison100
Adams81
Gallia71
Van Wert60
Pike60
Meigs60
Noble50
Morgan50
Unassigned00
Fort Wayne
Clear
68° wxIcon
Hi: 74° Lo: 52°
Feels Like: 68°
Angola
Few Clouds
64° wxIcon
Hi: 71° Lo: 50°
Feels Like: 64°
Huntington
Broken Clouds
69° wxIcon
Hi: 72° Lo: 52°
Feels Like: 69°
Decatur
Broken Clouds
66° wxIcon
Hi: 74° Lo: 52°
Feels Like: 66°
Van Wert
Broken Clouds
66° wxIcon
Hi: 72° Lo: 52°
Feels Like: 66°
Scattered Showers & Storms Friday
WFFT Radar
WFFT Temperatures
WFFT National

Community Events