Internet Travel Monitor - Industry News

June 28, 2017

US Supreme Court to Hear Travel Ban Case; Allows Partial Ban for Now
The US Supreme Court said later this year it will hear the case against US President Donald Trump’s revised executive order temporarily banning nationals from six countries from traveling to the US, but also has allowed the ban to be partially implemented in the interim.

Trump’s second executive order had been blocked by lower courts, with the prohibition on implementing the so-called travel ban upheld in large part by two US federal appeals courts’ rulings. The case will now be heard by the Supreme Court when it convenes in October, the court announced June 26.

In its announcement, the court granted a partial stay on the lower court rulings while the case proceeds, permitting enforcement of the ban against nationals from the six countries applying for US travel visas who have never before traveled to the US and/or cannot prove family or business ties to the US. The ban, in its second revised form issued March 6, applies to Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

The executive order “may not be enforced against foreign nationals who have a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States,” the Supreme Court stated.

The court detailed exactly who the travel ban cannot be applied to: “For individuals, a close familial relationship is required. A foreign national who wishes to enter the United States to live with or visit a family member … clearly has such a relationship. As for entities, the relationship must be formal, documented, and formed in the ordinary course, rather than for the purpose of evading [the ban]. The students from the designated countries who have been admit­ted to the University of Hawaii have such a relationship with an American entity. So too would a worker who accepted an offer of employment from an American com­pany or a lecturer invited to address an American audience. Not so someone who enters into a relationship simply to avoid [the ban]. For example, a nonprofit group devoted to immigration issues may not contact foreign nationals from the designated countries, add them to client lists, and then secure their entry by claiming injury from their exclusion.”

Copyright 2017 Penton. All rights reserved. From By Mark Nensel.
To view the Internet Travel Monitor Archive, click