Supreme Court Won’t Hear Oral Arguments on Legality of Trump’s Travel Ban

The Supreme Court said Tuesday it won’t hear oral arguments on the legality of President Donald Trump’s travel ban — for now — but the legal fight over efforts to halt entry to the United States from certain countries is far from settled.

Justices dismissed the second of two cases challenging the legality of the President’s controversial travel ban, saying that key provisions of Trump’s March executive order have expired.

“Because those provisions of the order have “expired by [their] own terms,” the appeal no longer presents a “live case or controversy,” the justices wrote in a one-page ruling.

The court said it expressed “no view on the merits” of the case, and the legal battle remains alive and well in lower court. Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted that she would have left the lower court order in place.

Trump issued a new executive order late month — dubbed “Travel Ban 3.0” — which is already before the lower courts, and those challenges are likely to make their way back up to the Supreme Court on an emergency basis.

A federal judge in Hawaii has already issued a nationwide injunction blocking most of Trump’s newest travel ban.

The second version of the travel ban, also issued in March, had barred residents of six Muslim-majority countries — Iran, Syria, Libya, Sudan, Somalia and Yemen. Travel Ban 3.0, which was set to take effect last week, covers eight countries — Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, Somalia and Yemen. (The Hawaii ruling does not impact the restrictions on North Korea and Venezuela.)

Click here to read more.

SOURCE: CNN, Ariane de Vogue