Supreme Court To Hear Trump’s Travel Ban Case

CBS News reports:

The Supreme Court has decided to hear arguments on President Trump’s travel ban affecting citizens of six mostly Muslim countries and will be argued in October. The country had been waiting for the court to make its decision public about the biggest legal controversy in the first five months of Mr. Trump’s presidency.

The Supreme Court usually saves its most important decisions for the final day of the term. The issue has been tied up in the courts since his original order in January sparked confusion and widespread protests just days after he took office.

The justices met Thursday morning for their last regularly scheduled private conference in June and probably took a vote then about whether to let the Trump administration immediately enforce the ban and hear the administration’s appeal of lower court rulings blocking the ban.

The court had to decide before late this week, after which the justices will scatter for the summer for speeches, teaching gigs and vacations. It would have taken five votes to reinstate the ban, but it only took four to set the case for argument. Justice Neil Gorsuch, Mr. Trump’s nominee who was confirmed in April, is taking part in the highest-profile issue yet in his three months on the court.

  • John Smith
    • safari

      You should save this for another_steve. His maine coon seems to like stepping on his crotch.

      • Brian Burleson

        So does he.

  • bkmn

    As long as they keep using the same arguments they have been using all along I don’t see this having much of an impact.

    • Rambie

      That’s why they want Kennedy to retire, so they can stack the court

  • james1200
  • Tomcat

    No Muslim ban for the Summer at least, that is good.

  • Do Something Nice

    So Trump lost as the lower court rulings remain.

  • Butch

    So any lawerly types out there – how likely is the Supreme Court to overturn decisions by a series of lower courts?

    • The_Wretched

      Absent the ‘national security’ card the US SCOTUS just pulled, i would have said the EO was DOA for the many and strong reasons cited by all of the lower courts so far. The new Gorsuch court signalled that they will give Trump the entire EO to our national shame.

      • clay

        The only hope is that push the Solicitor General on that “finding” of national security. PROVE that Trump, or his minions, based this on facts.

  • Rebecca Gardner

    The real question is this, “why is Trump still fighting for his ban?” This was a ban that was to be put into place for 90 days. 90 days has come and gone and there has been absolutely no terrorist threats or activity that this ban would have protected us from. By the time SCOTUS hears this and delivers their decision, more than a year will have passed. That’s a lot more than 90 days.

    So, it’s more about Trump “Winning” than it is about protecting Americans from the complete non-threat of Moose-Lambs.

    • Rambie

      Wasn’t that obvious from the start?

    • Skokieguy [Larry]

      The real question is this, “why is Trump still fighting for his ban?” Because he is desperate to do anything. Because when the courts have said NO over and over again, his delicate ego was hurt and its essentially revenge at this point to try and get it passed.

      • bkmn

        Dominance is very important to him, on all levels.

        • bambinoitaliano

          Except being a bitch to Putin that he is.

          • JCF
          • Albertadcastro

            I get paid over $87 per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. Here’s what I do
            ➽➽➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialCashJobs50OfficeBook/GetPaid$97/Hour ★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫★✫★★✫:::!kq50g:…

          • Heatherjedwards

            I get paid over $87 per hour working from home with 2 kids at home.
            On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
            ➽➽;➽➽ http://GooogleFinancialJobsCash58MediaClub/GetPay$97/Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!yc58k…..

    • zhera

      I don’t believe that they planned for the ban to last only 90 days. They said so because it’d be easier for some to accept it that way, but the tRump administration would’ve found reasons to keep it going.

      Another thing: How is that ban not the simplest, most obvious case of religious discrimination? All they have is ‘muslims bad, mmkay?’

      • The_Wretched

        The lower courts had little difficulty finding religious discrimination and several other grounds for blocking the muslim ban.

    • Exactly. It was meant to be a 90 day ban while they review and revise vetting procedures. Any judge hearing this should be asking whether those vetting procedures are done yet and if not, why not.

    • Acronym Jim

      There was a moron in the comments section of the Oregonian who tried to make the argument that “you need to shut down the machine in order to make the upgrade.”


      • The_Wretched

        They make the same argument about healthcare when you force them to admit losing coverage for millions is a bad thing.

    • Miji

      He apparently still hasn’t figured out “what the hell is going on”. Wasn’t that how he originally described the necessary duration of the ban?

    • JCF

      You don’t really think he’s going to stop @ 90 days, do you?

  • Skokieguy [Larry]

    What is so insane is the original ban was for 90 days to ‘sort things out’. Despite the incoherence of that rationale, more than 90 days have elapsed. So if Trump felt this was a critical national security issue, either he has failed the country but not ‘sorting things out’, or there is nothing to sort out, no issue, and this was a pretext for ‘let’s be mean to people who look / seem different to give my base something to fap to”.

    • Do Something Nice

      It is symbolic and maybe testing the waters. This is a Trump campaign promise.

      • Skokieguy [Larry]

        Agreed, but he made the promise on the basis of the urgent need to sort things out. He has done nothing to sort things out in a longer time frame that the original ban would have provided.

        • Do Something Nice

          Are you sure he’s done nothing? Maybe you missed that tweet.

        • clay

          He’s gotten rid of automated background checks, relying, instead, on slower human workers. He’s made the US less attractive to international immigration through deporting people he’d promised (sorta) could stay. In fact, the one nation he removed from his list wasn’t to protect the Christians, but because they promised to take those he deported.

    • Stephen Elliot Phillips

      If u think the ban was ever gonna be just for 90 days and just a small time frame so the nazis could sort things out, ive got some nice land in south louisiana that will never flood i can sell you.
      This was a pandoras box. Same with everything they do.
      Bush the 2nd promoted the massive tax cuts as a “stimulus” and wasnt supposed to be the lasting tax rate for the uber wealthy. Now its the norm.
      Thats how they work. They force us to eat shit and after a while we become used to the taste.
      They are slowly eroding our way of life. Drip by drip.

      • Skokieguy [Larry]

        Never thought that. Once in place, it would simply not be lifted (unless Trump needed a person from that country to fly to the US to discuss Trump businesses). But on its face, when reviewing Trump’s actual words and purported intent, its a farce.

        • Stephen Elliot Phillips

          Its all a farce with them.

      • clay

        “Temporary” tax cuts to go with that “temporary” sequestration.

        • The_Wretched

          The “temporary” also changes how the CBO is required to score it.

  • Do Something Nice

    The ban is in place for those who have no connection to the US. So anyone coming here for tourism from one of those countries ARE banned from entering the US and will not get a visa.

    • clay

      SO many tourists from Syria,


  • Gay Fordham Prep Grad

    So the ban remains in effect; they are going to hear the case in October, and issue a decision, possibly as late as next June?

    • on a ban that had a 90 day shelf life.

    • clay

      “remains” in effect? GOES into effect.
      Except not the ban on the visa-free entries also included in the EO.

      • The_Wretched

        It’s almost like the SCT and WH have no idea what they are actually banning or not due to shear incompetence.

        • clay

          The WH has no “finding” of national security risk, so . . .

  • Leo

    Wait a minute, other sources are saying the majority CAN take affect including the Associated Press. What’s happening? Is it or isn’t it?

  • CharlestonDave
    • so does the 90 day clock start running from today? or from the day or the orignal ban? or when?

    • The_Wretched

      This is so wrong.

    • clay

      Then they should impose the ban on all nations included in the EO (originally scheduled to kick in early to mid April)– either they’ve “figured things out” or they haven’t. The majority-Muslim nations were only to be the first round.

  • Gigi

    O/T but worth it. My PM came to the Pride parade in Toronto yesterday.

  • Boreal
    • The_Wretched

      Religions are parasites.

  • Mike C

    This needs an update: They’re ordering most of the ban go back into effect, immediately.

    • clay

      Why start a 90-day ban on day (about) 150?
      Because they get to.

  • Sam_Handwich
    • Treant

      Is it torches-and-pitchforks time yet?


      Call me when it is.

  • JWC

    let the tweets fly

  • Lazycrockett

    Everyday Im more ashamed of this country and its only been 6 months.

    • Bryan

      “How lowww can you go.”

  • Sam_Handwich
  • fuzzybits

    He had to keep this going to keep the support of his insane followers. He has nothing else and has done nothing. His racist followers are following this.

  • The_Wretched

    TinneyFoile hatte time: The travel ban was never just a stand-alone one-off. It’s part of a larger vision that President Steve Bannon has the for the US. That vision is destruction of the FEDGOV and replacing it with a theocracy. Does SCOTUS know about that vision and did that weigh into their decision? The signs and omens to look for are more positive stories about Steve Bannon as well as EOs ramping back to what they were doing back when Trump took office.

  • bambinoitaliano
    • The_Wretched

      Not to diminish the day or the cake but that looks like a regular wedding cake. It’s a cake that I’d expect every wedding cake making shop to be able to make.

      • DumbHairyApe


      • Mike_in_the_Tundra

        I really don’t understand your point. Did anybody say anything about who made it?

        • The_Wretched

          I’m being somewhat oblique.

          The legal standard baseline is 1. all customers must be treated equally 2. unless it’s a ‘purdy shotgun’ or specific performance (like a great opera singer). The second part there gives vendors more control on who they sell to and i used the terms that hint to the two controlling cases. A cake, even an ‘artistic’ wedding cake, falls into category 1. RWNJs will occasionally troll or argue that cakes are masterpiece works of art so that they can get the legal standards of part 2. Things in category 1 are makeable pretty much everywhere whereas things in category 2 are limited to genius artists and extremely popular performance artists.

  • boobert

    Be prepared for a bunch of losses when we lose a justice !

  • Max_1

    The most recent country to attack America was Russia…

  • JCF