The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled that the Trump administration may fully enforce a ban on travel to the United States by residents of six mostly Muslim countries.
President Trump has issued three versions of the controversial policy since taking office in January, however the action suggests that the version of the ban announced in September will be upheld by the courts.
In the latest ruling, seven of the nine judges lifted the injunctions held by lower courts earlier, putting a hold on the earlier rulings by the lower courts who had halted parts of Trump's travel ban earlier.
Saleh's recent defection from the rebel camp and now his death shattered the alliance that had helped the Iranian-backed rebels, known as Houthis, rise to power in 2014 - giving the government and the Saudi coalition supporting it with airstrikes hope for a turning point in a stalemated war that has brought humanitarian disaster.
"Justice Ginsburg and Justice Sotomayor would deny the application".
It was the latest version of the "Muslim ban" that had previously targeted six Muslim-majority countries, but had been restricted by the US Supreme Court.
"Based on that review, the proclamation adopts tailored entry restrictions to address extensive findings that a handful of particular foreign governments have deficient information-sharing and identity-management practices, or other risk factors", Francisco added.
The order is currently working its way through the lower courts, and the high court will still likely rule on its legality once the new version reaches their docket.
"President Trump's anti-Muslim prejudice is no secret-he has repeatedly confirmed it, including just last week on Twitter".
The Supreme Court order is temporary.
The Houthis' top leader said Saleh paid the price for his "treason", accusing him of betraying their alliance to side with the Saudi-backed coalition.
Both courts are due to hear arguments in those cases this week.
Trump's travel ban was challenged by Hawaii and American Civil Liberties Union in separate lawsuits.
"The human impact is so real and it's severe", Tumlin said. The ban against the two countries took effect October 18. The government has maintained that the president has broad constitutional and statutory authority on matters of immigration and national security.
"This order is cut and dry: no analysis, no grappling with the law or facts-that's why we can't predict what the ultimate decision will be", Tumlin said. And the ACLU also says that it's unfortunate that the full ban can move forward now.
The order had gone into partial effect based on a middle-course position the Supreme Court set out in late June.
- ¡BOMBA! Messi y Ronaldo se unen para un sorpresivo proyecto
- "Bella Lazio ma il mio desiderio è…" — Mauro Mazza
- Ventana de transferencia de enero: Real Madrid y Barcelona
- Fuerzas Armadas descalifican propuesta de amnistía al narco
- Griezmann, el mejor futbolista francés del 2016
- Real Madrid could deepen Athletic Bilbao's crisis in La Liga
- De Vido y Cameron, indagados por gasoductos adjudicados a Odebrecht
- La historia real detrás de Molly’s Game
- La CNDH ve riesgo potencial en aplicación de Ley de Seguridad Interior
- Beyoncé cambia su dirección de email cada semana