Only family visits will be allowed from people living in the 6 countries

[OSR stands with Israel]

The travel ban applied


https://www.google.com/amp/www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/amp/u-s-defines-who-can-enter-under-travel-ban-n778031

[elcorazon]

[OSR stands with Israel]

Why , people who have relations in this country (whether by permenant residency, work , school,or family ) the travel ban doesn't apply to them one bit , it just affects new applicants (with no relations in the country ) and tourists .

[Tintrlvr]

This will be thrown out in the courts immediately. No grandparents allowed in? No way these guidelines comport with the approach outlined by the Supreme Court's order, and the lower courts have made clear that they are willing to be aggressive here.

[OSR stands with Israel]

This will be thrown out in the courts immediately. No grandparents allowed in? No way these guidelines comport with the approach outlined by the Supreme Court's order, and the lower courts have made clear that they are willing to be aggressive here.

This is 100 percent constitutional, as no people with existing visas will be blocked and their is no religious test being used to ban people .


I'm sorry but any judge who throws this out is clearly overstteping his bounds .

[Tintrlvr]

This will be thrown out in the courts immediately. No grandparents allowed in? No way these guidelines comport with the approach outlined by the Supreme Court's order, and the lower courts have made clear that they are willing to be aggressive here.

This is 100 percent constitutional, as no people with existing visas will be blocked and their is no religious test being used to ban people .


I'm sorry but any judge who throws this out is clearly overstteping his bounds .

The Supreme Court clearly stated that the ban could not go into effect with respect to people with a "bona fide relationship" with persons in the United States. This bans people with, for example, grandchildren or fiance(e)s who are residents of the United States from entering the country. There is absolutely no question whatsoever that those are "bona fide relationships" (the court even specifically mentioned extended family), and therefore the guidelines are in defiance of the Supreme Court's order.

Any judge who fails to throw this out is clearly in defiance of the Supreme Court of the United States, just as the administration is.

[Boston Bread]

Even though I opposed it I thought the ban would be constitutional once green card and visa holders were exempt. Not sure why immediate family would be unconstitutional but everything else is fine.

[Tintrlvr]

Even though I opposed it I thought the ban would be constitutional once green card and visa holders were exempt. Not sure why immediate family would be unconstitutional but everything else is fine.

The argument is that it's a due process violation (deprivation of fundamental rights of association and family) for the persons or entities with whom the potential immigrants/visitors have a relationship. I agree with you that I thought the courts would go the other way originally, but it's clear now that they, and even the Supreme Court (who obviously agreed with that distinction, given their statement that the ban had to be suspended with respect to persons with a bona fide relationship* with persons or entities in the United States), will not.

*Which went well beyond immediate family. The court's example of a person without a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States was a person who had no contacts whatsoever with the United States other than a post hoc contact with an immigration rights organization. Which makes it clear that they intended for their order to sweep much more broadly than this standard does.

[Hammy]

This will be thrown out in the courts immediately. No grandparents allowed in? No way these guidelines comport with the approach outlined by the Supreme Court's order, and the lower courts have made clear that they are willing to be aggressive here.

As far as I know, no courts can throw it out if this is the Supreme Court's decision, which is final.

[AtorBoltox]

This will be thrown out in the courts immediately. No grandparents allowed in? No way these guidelines comport with the approach outlined by the Supreme Court's order, and the lower courts have made clear that they are willing to be aggressive here.

As far as I know, no courts can throw it out if this is the Supreme Court's decision, which is final.

Any lower court can rule that the details of the ban don't comply with the Supreme Court ruling

[Famous Mortimer]

Even though I opposed it I thought the ban would be constitutional once green card and visa holders were exempt. Not sure why immediate family would be unconstitutional but everything else is fine.

The argument is that it's a due process violation (deprivation of fundamental rights of association and family) for the persons or entities with whom the potential immigrants/visitors have a relationship. I agree with you that I thought the courts would go the other way originally, but it's clear now that they, and even the Supreme Court (who obviously agreed with that distinction, given their statement that the ban had to be suspended with respect to persons with a bona fide relationship* with persons or entities in the United States), will not.

*Which went well beyond immediate family. The court's example of a person without a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States was a person who had no contacts whatsoever with the United States other than a post hoc contact with an immigration rights organization. Which makes it clear that they intended for their order to sweep much more broadly than this standard does.

No one is being denied the right to see their family. If a Sudanese person living in America wants to see their family, they can go to Sudan. Same goes for all "family reunification" excuses that are supposed to justify a never ending torrent of foreigners.

Might as well not even have the travel ban if it's going allow "brothers" and "sisters" of people from Somalia and Yemen. These countries don't even issue birth certificates half the time and everyone is everyone's "sibling" because they are tribal societies.

[Thomas Jackson]

This will be thrown out in the courts immediately. No grandparents allowed in? No way these guidelines comport with the approach outlined by the Supreme Court's order, and the lower courts have made clear that they are willing to be aggressive here.

Wrong.