The Supreme Court hinted on Monday it might dismiss a challenge to Donald Trump’s controversial travel restrictions after the White House has issued reviewed proclamation on eight countries that legal experts said stand a better chance in court, Reuters informs.
The high court has canceled the oral arguments set to be held on October 10 where the court had to decide whether or not a March 6 executive order was discriminatory. After the restrictions expired on Sunday, the president issued a replacement with a proclamation that indefinitely restricts travel from Iran, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Chad and North Korea. Several government officials from Venezuela will also be restricted to enter the U.S. The new restrictions could affect tens of thousands of potential immigrants and visitors.
Trump has been attempting to create a ban that passes court muster. The Sunday order, which he said is needed to screen out terrorist or public safety threats, could be less prone to legal attack, scholars and other experts said, because it results from a months-long analysis of foreign vetting procedures by the U.S. officials. It also might be less easily tied to Trump’s campaign-trail statements some courts viewed as biased against Muslims.
“The greater the sense that the policy reflects a considered, expert judgement, the less the temptation (by courts) to second-guess the executive,” said Saikrishna Prakash, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, in an email. “It looks less like a matter of prejudice or a desire to fulfill a campaign promise.”
Be the first to comment