US court deals blow to Trump travel ban

2017-09-08 11:59
(Evan Vucci, AP)

(Evan Vucci, AP)

Multimedia   ·   User Galleries   ·   News in Pictures Send us your pictures  ·  Send us your stories

Los Angeles - A federal court in California dealt a new blow to the Trump administration's travel ban, ruling that some refugees must be allowed into the country.

It is the latest twist of the legal wrangling touched off by US President Donald Trump's ban, first announced in January with little notice and widely criticised as discriminatory against Muslims.

Trump says it is needed to keep out terrorists.

In the new ruling, the US Ninth Circuit of Appeals, based in San Francisco, upheld a ruling by a court in Hawaii, a decision against which the administration had appealed.

The new decision states that the ban must exclude "refugees who have a formal assurance from an agency within the United States that the agency will provide or ensure the provision of reception and placement services to that refugee".

'Close family'

It could pave the way for the entry of some 24 000 refugees whose asylum requests had already been approved.

And as the US Supreme Court had ruled in July, the three-judge panel in San Francisco confirmed that the ban cannot be applied to grandparents and other close family members living in six mainly Muslim countries and seeking to visit relatives in the US.

The Supreme Court ruled in late June that the 90-day travel ban, purportedly aimed at better screening out potential security risks, can be broadly enforced for travellers from the six mainly Muslim countries "who lack any bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States".

Days later, the Trump administration interpreted that to mean that only "close family" was exempted. It defined this as the parents, spouses, children, sons- and daughters-in-law, siblings and step- and half-siblings of people in the US.

The California court said on Wednesday, September 6, the administration "does not offer a persuasive explanation for why a mother-in-law is clearly a bona fide relationship in the Supreme Court's prior reasoning, but a grandparent, grandchild, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew or cousin is not".

The San Francisco court was ruling on the issue because the Supreme Court had refused a Justice Department request that it define what it means by "bona fide relationship" and "close family".

The Justice Department issued a statement saying: "We will now return to the Supreme Court to vindicate the executive branch duty to protect the nation."

The Supreme Court is scheduled to revisit the travel ban and study its constitutionality in October.

Read more on:    us  |  refugees  |  migrants

Join the conversation!

24.com encourages commentary submitted via MyNews24. Contributions of 200 words or more will be considered for publication.

We reserve editorial discretion to decide what will be published.
Read our comments policy for guidelines on contributions.
NEXT ON NEWS24X

Inside News24

 
/News
Traffic Alerts
Traffic
There are new stories on the homepage. Click here to see them.
 
English
Afrikaans
isiZulu

Hello 

Create Profile

Creating your profile will enable you to submit photos and stories to get published on News24.


Please provide a username for your profile page:

This username must be unique, cannot be edited and will be used in the URL to your profile page across the entire 24.com network.

Settings

Location Settings

News24 allows you to edit the display of certain components based on a location. If you wish to personalise the page based on your preferences, please select a location for each component and click "Submit" in order for the changes to take affect.




Facebook Sign-In

Hi News addict,

Join the News24 Community to be involved in breaking the news.

Log in with Facebook to comment and personalise news, weather and listings.