Pending legal arguments before the Supreme Court regarding President Donald Trump’s travel ban this fall, the justices today allowed a limited version of the ban to go into effect.

Foreign nationals from six majority-Muslim nations who lack any “bona fide relationship with any person or entity in the United States” can be denied entry to the country in the meantime, the high court said. Students accepted to U.S. universities and those who have accepted a job in America were cited as examples of allowable interim immigrants.

The unsigned opinion is seen as partial victory for the Trump administration, which has been blocked by lower court rulings in its efforts impose the travel ban. The administration insists the ban is merely a security measure, while the lower courts have agreed with those who say in reality it is a Muslim ban and therefore is in violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

American public opinion and that of many meeting professionals has been solidly in favor of killing the travel ban.

Paul Van Deventer, President and CEO of Meeting Professionals International, commended the justices for taking action. “MPI believes that it’s critical to strike the right balance between enhanced security and travel facilitation,” says Van Deventer. “We continue to encourage the administration to enhance our country’s safety, while also promoting it as a welcoming destination for international travelers. As such, we are pleased that the Supreme Court has brought clarity to the executive order.”

In an official White House statement, Mr. Trump hailed the court’s action as “a clear victory for our national security. As president, I cannot allow people into our country who want to do us harm.”

Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Neil M. Gorsuch, dissented from part of the court’s opinion. They said they would have revived the travel ban in its entirety while the court considered the case.

The court agreed to review two lower court rulings upholding the ban and said it would hear arguments in October, noting the Trump administration had not asked it to act faster. Court observers have speculated the case could be moot by the time it is argued because justification for the travel ban in the first place – an opportunity for the government to review and likely revise rules on visitors from specific Muslim-majority nations – could be completed before then.

advertisement