Left-leaning judges have been fighting President Donald Trump on his proposed travel restrictions since he took office, but the Supreme Court has just handed the White House a major win.
On Monday, the highest court in America ruled that the administration can enforce a travel ban that applies to six countries located in the Middle East and Africa.
Non-citizens from Chad, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen will continue to have their visits to the United States heavily restricted. All of the countries on the list are considered unstable and have past connections to terrorist groups.
Previous courts declared that anybody with a “bona fide” relationship to an American citizen could not be prevented from visiting from the restricted countries. For example, a Libyan person with a cousin in the United States would have been able to circumvent the travel ban.
However, the Supreme Court overruled, and sided with the Trump administration. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented, while the remaining justices agreed with the White House.
According to The Associated Press, lower courts in California and Virginia will hear additional arguments related to the so-called travel ban later in the week.
Those remaining cases could be brought to the Supreme Court within six months. However, the court’s decision to side with Trump at this time does not bode well for his opponents.
“The action suggests the high court could uphold the latest version of the ban that Trump announced in September,” explained the AP.
While people opposed to travel restrictions have tried to spin them as a “Muslim ban,” religion is in fact not one of the criteria that is included in the order. Instead, the political stability and prevalence of terrorist groups are the main factors that cause a country to be placed on the restricted list.
Recent incidents such as the New York truck attack and France terrorist attack have demonstrated the importance of carefully vetting visitors.
“This underscores the need for us to be diligent and have a program and have an effort where people have to let us know who they are and that they came in here legitimately. Why have borders, otherwise?” one of the founders of Home Depot declared after his company’s rented truck was used by a radical immigrant to kill eight people in October.
“We ought to know who’s coming to America, we ought to know something about their background, like we do with all legitimate immigrants. And, this argument that we should look the other way with illegitimate immigrants is nuts,” summarized businessman Ken Langone at the time.
It seems that the Supreme Court agreed with him.
There is nothing racist about wanting to prevent people in the world’s most unstable areas from pouring across the border and bringing radical views with them.
If anything, it is common sense: You don’t open the door of your house for a stranger from a bad neighborhood at midnight — not without asking a few questions, at least.
No non-citizen has a “right” to enter the country any more than an intruder has the “right” to barge into your home without permission.
Doing this to keep your family safe is prudent. It isn’t any less prudent to do the same thing when it comes to safeguarding the entire country.
The president’s opponents have been trying to defeat him on this issue since day one, but it looks like even more “winning” for Trump supporters.
Please share this article on Facebook if you agree with the Supreme Court: America should be able to control who enters the country!