On Wednesday, the US Supreme Court rejected President Donald Trump’s attempt to include grandparents and other relatives in his controversial travel ban. But Trump achieved a partial win, with the government being given more leeway to enforce a different ban on immigrant refugees, which was part of an executive order issued by the President on 6 March, based on the grounds of national security.
Last Thursday, a federal judge ruled against both the bans, and the administration immediately sought intervention from the Supreme Court. The decision means that relatives of people from the six nations on the travel ban list who live in the US cannot be denied access to the country.
Court papers suggest that the Supreme Court decision on immigrant refugees could see as many as 24,000 who are connected to a resettlement agency in the US denied entry. The decision is a temporary one, according to the brief, while the same issue will undergo a separate appeal with the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, which is based in San Francisco.
Last month, the Supreme Court intervened in the legal battle over the President’s executive order. It partially revived the two bans, but the administration’s narrow interpretation of the language in the ruling to suggest immediate relations did not count as a ‘bona fide relationship’ to a US citizen was described as ‘the antithesis of common sense’ by District Judge, Derrick Watson.