After a futile attempt to cajole judges to issue its travel ban bill, the White House is compelled to turn to the Supreme Court with its small conservative majority.
The Department of Justice made a formal request to the Supreme Court on Thursday to issue the bill which prevents migration of six (mostly Muslim) countries and refugees from all over the world from entering its country. The Supreme Court is also being told to show the legitimacy of the travel policy, which lower courts have denied due to its bias nature.
The White House is relying on its ability to cajole a minimum of five judges out of a nine-member court to pass the bill considering the president’s responsibility for keeping the nation safe.
President Trump basis his travel ban bill on national security
Acting Solicitor General stated in a petition that President Trump is persuaded that a 90-days halt on migration from Libya, Iran, Somalia, Syria, Sudan and Yemen is required to protect national security.
Wall wrote that the courts doubted the president’s discovery that those conditions provided the basis for the temporary pause. The White House administration has also decided to pause the U.S. refugee program for a hundred-and-twenty-days.
The Director of the Immigrants’ Rights Project, Omar Jadwat, said the White House shouldn’t interrupt court injunction against the travel ban bill. He also said the government has not presented any legal ground by which the Supreme Court would override the lower court injunction.
Justice Department tells Supreme Court to disregard Trump's campaign statements
The justice department petitions mirror similar arguments made by its attorneys in the lower courts, including their opinion that statements made by the president during the election campaign should not be regarded.
Both the federal judge in Hawaii and the 4th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals referenced the president’s campaign statements as proof that religious bias is the foundation of the ban. Those court rulings are the basis of the Justice Department filings to the Supreme Court.
Wall stated in his high court petition in favor of the bill that the court of appeals’ judgment lacked substance without the campaign materials.
Wall stated that the recent statements by the president to the Middle Eastern Leaders in Saudi Arabia reflects that Trump’s policy was not racially motivated because the president categorically said the war against terrorism was not a religious battle.
