Sponsored message
Audience-funded nonprofit news
radio tower icon laist logo
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
Subscribe
  • Listen Now Playing Listen
KPCC Archive

US Supreme Court to hear arguments on Trump travel ban

A police officer stands guard on the steps of the US Supreme Court in Washington, DC, June 15, 2017. / AFP PHOTO / JIM WATSON        (Photo credit should read JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images)
FILE: The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the state of Hawaii's challenge to the Trump administration travel ban.
(
JIM WATSON/AFP/Getty Images
)

With our free press under threat and federal funding for public media gone, your support matters more than ever. Help keep the LAist newsroom strong, become a monthly member or increase your support today.

Listen 0:52
US Supreme Court to hear arguments on Trump travel ban
The court will consider Hawaii's challenge to the revised travel ban. At issue: whether officials can block entry of those from certain Muslim-majority countries.

The U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear arguments Wednesday on the legality of President Trump’s travel ban. At issue is whether the federal government can legally block the entry of people from several Muslim-majority countries.

The justices will focus on Hawaii's challenge to the third version of Trump's travel ban, which was revised following early legal objections. 

The case is the first major challenge to Trump's immigration policies to go before the justices.  

Announced in a proclamation last September, the current travel ban blocks the entry of most people from the Muslim-dominant nations of Iran, Syria, Yemen, Libya and Somalia. Chad was also on the list, but was recently removed. It also blocks the entry of people from North Korea and a limited number of government officials from Venezuela, although those provisions aren't part of the legal challenge.

Sponsored message

The state of Hawaii has argued that Trump’s order unfairly targets people on the basis of their religion and national origin. The Trump administration officials say they chose the targeted countries  based on national security issues, and whether the countries were willing to cooperate with U.S. officials on these issues. 

The Trump administration's attempts to block certain travelers and immigrants have been subject to legal challenges since January 2017, when the president first introduced an executive order banning people from seven Muslim-majority countries. The order  caused chaos in airports around the country, including at Los Angeles International Airport.

Since then, the Trump administration has introduced two modified versions of the travel ban.

Back in October, federal courts in Hawaii and Maryland blocked the third and latest version of the ban from taking effect. In his temporary restraining order, U.S. District Court Judge Derrick K. Watson in Hawaii wrote that the travel ban "plainly discriminates based on nationality."

However, in December, following a request from the Trump administration, the Supreme Court allowed the revised travel ban to be implemented  while the legal challenges play out.

The court's action allowed the government to ban or restrict immigration and travel from the countries listed in the revised ban, most of them with Muslim majorities. Entry to most travelers from the affected countries has been restricted.

In its September  proclamation announcing the current travel ban, the Trump administration barred most immigrant and non-immigrant travel from the listed countries but said travelers could obtain "case-by-case waivers" from the ban. According to recent news reports, these waivers have  rarely been granted

Sponsored message

The SCOTUSblog  said there are two main issues that the high court will consider: first, whether the president exceeded his authority over immigration by issuing the September proclamation. Second, the justices will weigh whether the order violates the U.S. Constitution's establishment clause, which among its provisions bars the government from favoring one religion over another.

Many eyes will be on Justice Neil Gorsuch, Trump's appointee to the Supreme Court. Gorsuch surprised some observers when he sided with liberal colleagues in declaring a Trump-defended immigration deportation law as too vague to be enforced.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision in the travel ban case in June. 

At LAist, we believe in journalism without censorship and the right of a free press to speak truth to those in power. Our hard-hitting watchdog reporting on local government, climate, and the ongoing housing and homelessness crisis is trustworthy, independent and freely accessible to everyone thanks to the support of readers like you.

But the game has changed: Congress voted to eliminate funding for public media across the country. Here at LAist that means a loss of $1.7 million in our budget every year. We want to assure you that despite growing threats to free press and free speech, LAist will remain a voice you know and trust. Speaking frankly, the amount of reader support we receive will help determine how strong of a newsroom we are going forward to cover the important news in our community.

We’re asking you to stand up for independent reporting that will not be silenced. With more individuals like you supporting this public service, we can continue to provide essential coverage for Southern Californians that you can’t find anywhere else. Become a monthly member today to help sustain this mission.

Thank you for your generous support and belief in the value of independent news.
Senior Vice President News, Editor in Chief

Chip in now to fund your local journalism

A row of graphics payment types: Visa, MasterCard, Apple Pay and PayPal, and  below a lock with Secure Payment text to the right