On June 26, 2017, the Supreme Court partially reinstated the Trump administration’s travel ban. This decision has caused a great deal of controversy and confusion, as it is unclear exactly which foreign nationals are now able to travel to the United States.
The travel ban was first announced in January of 2017, shortly after Trump took office. It initially blocked entry to the United States for citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. The ban was met with widespread criticism, and several federal courts issued rulings blocking its implementation.
In September of 2017, the Trump administration announced a revised travel ban, which removed Iraq from the list of banned countries and made it easier for certain visa applicants to qualify for exemption. The revised ban was also met with criticism, and several federal courts issued rulings blocking its implementation.
The Supreme Court’s recent decision allows the Trump administration to partially enforce the travel ban, pending the outcome of a full hearing in the fall. The Court’s ruling applies to foreign nationals who do not have a “credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States.” This vague definition has caused a great deal of confusion, as it is not clear which individuals and organizations fall into this category.
The State Department has issued guidance on how to determine if a relationship is “credible.” For example, a relationship with a spouse, parent, child, or sibling is considered credible, while a relationship with a friend or coworker is not. The Department has also said that it will give more weight to relationships with entities that are “closely affiliated” with the United States, such as universities and hospitals.
The Trump administration has defended the travel ban as a necessary measure to protect national security. However, critics argue that the ban is discriminatory and that it is not actually necessary to protect national security. They also argue that the ban will harm the U.S. economy and that it will damage America’s relationships with other countries.
The Supreme Court’s decision in the travel ban case is sure to be controversial. It is unclear how the full hearing in the fall will play out, and the outcome could have a significant impact on the Trump administration’s policies.
Contents
Was Trump’s travel ban constitutional?
On January 27, 2017, President Donald Trump signed an executive order entitled “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States.” This order restricted travel from seven Muslim-majority countries for 90 days, suspended the U.S. refugee program for 120 days, and indefinitely suspended the Syrian refugee program. It also reduced the number of refugees who could be admitted to the United States in 2017 from 110,000 to 50,000.
The order was met with protests and legal challenges. A federal judge in Seattle issued a temporary restraining order blocking the order on February 3. On February 9, a federal appeals court upheld the restraining order. The Trump administration then asked the Supreme Court to intervene. On June 26, the Supreme Court upheld the lower court’s decision, ruling that the travel ban violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
What is the Presidential Proclamation 9645?
Presidential Proclamation 9645 establishes the new United States-Central America-Dominican Republic Free Trade Agreement (USCADFTA). The USCADFTA is designed to create new opportunities for trade and investment between the United States and its Central American and Dominican Republic partners.
The USCADFTA will reduce or eliminate tariffs and other barriers to trade in goods and services, and will provide new opportunities for investors. The Agreement will also promote economic integration in the region, and will support the creation and retention of jobs in the United States and Central America.
The USCADFTA entered into force on March 1, 2013, and is the first U.S. free trade agreement with a Central American country.
Is Executive Order 13780 still in effect?
Executive Order 13780, also known as the “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States” executive order, was signed by President Donald Trump on March 6, 2017. The order restricted travel to the United States for nationals of six Muslim-majority countries: Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.
Several federal courts issued rulings blocking various provisions of the executive order. The most significant ruling came from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which upheld a nationwide injunction blocking the order’s travel restrictions.
On September 24, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed a limited version of the travel ban to go into effect. The ban will expire on October 24, 2017.
When was the travel ban passed?
The travel ban was passed on January 27, 2017, just days after President Donald Trump was inaugurated. The order instituted a 90-day ban on travel to the United States by citizens of seven majority-Muslim countries: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. It also indefinitely suspended the admission of refugees into the United States.
The order caused widespread confusion and chaos at airports around the world as people were detained and deported, and lawsuits were filed. A federal judge in Seattle issued a temporary restraining order preventing the government from enforcing the ban. The case eventually went to the U.S. Supreme Court, which allowed a limited version of the travel ban to go into effect in June 2017.
Is the travel ban still in effect?
The travel ban is a policy that was put into place by the Trump administration in January of 2017. The policy prohibits people from certain Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States. The travel ban has been met with a lot of controversy, with many people arguing that it is unconstitutional. A number of legal challenges have been made against the travel ban, and the Supreme Court has ruled that the ban can go into effect while the challenges are being heard.
What did Executive Order 13769 do?
Executive Order 13769, also known as the “Muslim Ban” was signed by President Donald Trump on January 27, 2017. This order barred people from seven majority-Muslim countries from entering the United States for 90 days, all refugees for 120 days, and Syrian refugees indefinitely.
This order caused much chaos and controversy. It was quickly challenged in court, and on February 3 a federal judge in Seattle issued a nationwide temporary restraining order to stop the implementation of the ban. The Department of Justice appealed the ruling, and on February 9 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the restraining order.
Executive Order 13769 was eventually replaced by Executive Order 13780, which made some changes to the original order but still blocked people from the seven majority-Muslim countries from entering the United States.
Is proclamation 10043 still in effect?
Is proclamation 10043 still in effect?
This is a question that has been asked many times in the past few years, and the answer is not always clear. Proclamation 10043 was issued by President Obama in November 2014, and it granted temporary protected status (TPS) to certain nationals of Yemen.
However, there is some confusion about whether this proclamation is still in effect, since President Trump has issued several executive orders that have affected Yemen. In addition, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has not provided a clear answer about whether or not Yemenis currently in the United States with TPS will be allowed to stay.
So, is proclamation 10043 still in effect? The answer is not entirely clear, but it seems likely that it is still in effect. DHS has not announced any changes to the status of Yemenis with TPS, and President Trump has not specifically said that this proclamation is no longer in effect.
However, it is possible that this could change in the future, so Yemeni nationals in the United States should be aware of the possibility that their status may change at any time.