Sessions: Travel Ban Ruling Helps Restore Separation Of Powers

0
234
Sessions Travel Ban Ruling Helps Restore Separation Of Powers
Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Attorney General Jeff Sessions Monday praised the Supreme Court’s ruling allowing the federal government to implement much of President Donald Trump’s temporary ban on travel and immigration from several high-terrorism nations.

On Monday, the Court announced it will hear arguments about Trump’s executive order this fall, but in the meantime, it will allow the ban to take effect for travelers from those nations, with the exception of those with a “credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity” in the U.S.

“I am pleased that the Supreme Court has decided to hear this case,” Sessions said in a statement. “The Department of Justice looks forward to arguing on behalf of the President and his constitutional duty to protect the national security of the United States.”

Sessions said the ruling is “an important step towards restoring the separation of powers between the branches of the federal government.”

“This case raises profound questions about the proper balance of these constitutional powers, and we are eager to advance our views on these important issues,” he said. “The Department of Justice is confident that the United States Supreme Court will uphold this constitutional and necessary executive order.”

The president’s order was ruled unconstitutional in federal courts partly because of then-candidate Trump’s campaign rhetoric about Muslims. The administration has said the president has the authority to implement the policy outlined in the order, which targets Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

One analyst noted that the fact the Court never addressed Trump’s pre-election comments was significant.

“The 16 pages did not include any citations to President Trump’s campaign rhetoric,” said CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin. “And the Supreme Court seems reluctant to get into the business of that, which is why I always thought the president had the best chance of winning at the Supreme Court.”

“This is about the executive order itself. It is not about the campaign or anything else,” Toobin said.

Three justices — Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch — said the Court should have allowed the order to take effect without any qualifications.

“I fear that the court’s remedy will prove unworkable,” Thomas wrote. “Today’s compromise will burden executive officials with the task of deciding — on peril of contempt — whether individuals from the six affected nations who wish to enter the United States have a sufficient connection to a person or entity in this country.”

“The compromise also will invite a flood of litigation until this case is finally resolved on the merits, as parties and courts struggle to determine what exactly constitutes a ‘bona fide relationship,’ who precisely has a ‘credible claim’ to that relationship, and whether the claimed relationship was formed ‘simply to avoid’” the executive order, Thomas added.

Trump called the Court’s action as “a clear victory for our national security.”

A June 14 Trump administration statement said that if allowed to go forward, the ban would be implemented within 72 hours.

“The implementation of the executive order will be done professionally, with clear and sufficient public notice, particularly to potentially affected travelers, and in coordination with partners in the travel industry,” the Department of Homeland security said in the statement.

Like us on Facebook – USA Liberty News

What do you think? Scroll down to comment below.

Source: westernjournalism.com

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

LEAVE A REPLY