ORDINARILY, at the end of a Supreme Court oral argument, the chief justice announces that “the case is submitted”, the gavel bangs, and nothing more is heard until the ruling is released weeks later. Not so with Trump v Hawaii, the battle over the legality of Donald Trump’s travel ban that was heard on April 25th. A puzzling claim in the closing seconds of the Trump administration’s defence for barring 150m people, mainly Muslims, from America, has inspired a rare letter of correction from the solicitor-general, further damning statements from the White House and a counter-letter to the justices on behalf of the challengers.
The small flurry of post-hearing activity focuses on a central concern of the case: Mr Trump’s motivation in declaring his series of restrictions on travel to America. The challengers claim the ban should be seen in light of Mr Trump’s campaign-trail calls for a “complete and total shutdown” of Muslim travel into America and his anti-Muslim tweets and comments since taking office. The president’s...Continue reading
Source: United States https://ift.tt/2KStoVC
EmoticonEmoticon