The Supreme Court discharged one of the challenges to a recently lapsed category of President Trump's travel ban and the legitimate battle over its latest efforts to forbid some immigrants will require starting afresh.
But the Supreme Court is likely to ditch that case, which began in Hawaii, as well. But after the travel ban expired last month and a new policy was rolled out, the court canceled the argument and began to weigh whether it should decide the legality of the policy after all. International Refugee Assistance Project back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit with instructions to dismiss the case as moot - that is, no longer a live controversy.
The court dismissed it as a moot case from Maryland.More news: Nokia scraps VR camera division - over 300 employees affected
Jadwat argued the new executive order does not change the "religious condemnation" present in the earlier version, "which - despite some new window dressing - continues to relay a message of disparagement to the plaintiffs and other members of their faith".
One day after Trump issued his proclamation, the Supreme Court removed the travel-ban cases, which had been scheduled for oral argument on October 10, from its argument calendar.
The pending appeal by the government challenged a USA 4 Circuit Court of Appeals ruling. Though the Court does not explain why it treats these two cases differently, it likely stems from one crucial difference between them.More news: Overwatch's Halloween Event Is Now Live With New Seasonal Items
He subtracted Sudan and added in Chad, North Korea and Venezuela to the list of countries - Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen - that faced restrictions. Justice Sonia Sotomayor was the only justice to note her disagreement with this outcome; she would have dismissed the case as improvidently granted. In a somewhat confusing order, the Court held that "foreign nationals who have a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States" will not be subject to the ban while the Court takes more time to reach a final decision on how to resolve the case.
The Hawaii case also challenged a provision of the order that suspended the admission of refugees into the United States for 120 days. It asked the lower court rulings be erased. Technically, section 2 (c) of Executive Order No. 13,780 expired on September 24th, though it was replaced with a new travel ban impacting eight different nations. Thus, it appears that the Court views the refugee case as still live.More news: USA approves $15 billion worth THAAD missiles sale to Saudi Arabia
- 3 people wounded in Kenya protest to reform electoral body
- How Smart Speakers Differ Pricewise
- Heavy rain likely in northern Odisha
- Seahawks at Rams: Highlights, score and recap
- How to install MovieBox++ on iOS 11 devices without jailbreak
- VP Pence Leaves NFL Game After Players Protest During Anthem
- Russian Su-24 Warplane Crashes in Syria, All Crew Members Dead
- EPA Plans to Repeal Clean Power Plan
- United States approves $15 billion sale of THAAD missile system to Saudi Arabia
- Chicago Man Arrested For Vandalizing Christopher Columbus Statue