*By Alisha Haridasani* The Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld President Trump’s temporary ban on immigrants and refugees from several mostly Muslim countries, rejecting the arguments that the policy went beyond presidential powers and discriminated against one religion. “The president has lawfully exercised the broad discretion granted to him,” said Chief Justice John Roberts, [writing](http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2018/images/06/26/travel.ban.pdf) for the majority. The 5-4 ruling fell along partisan lines, and the difference between the two sides fundamentally boiled down to a close reading of the Constitution as it applied to the travel policy versus a broader approach to the case. "Certainly the conservative block of the Supreme Court was looking very narrowly at the president's power," said Joe Williams, senior news editor at U.S. News. "The opposing side was looking more at whether or not this was the right thing to do." The justices who dissented pointed to Trump's campaign promise to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. as potentially motivating the policy, in which case it would be unlawful. “The United States of America is a nation built upon the promise of religious liberty,” wrote Justice Sonia Sotomayor in a strongly-worded dissent. “The court’s decision today fails to safeguard that principle.” Judge Sotomayor even went so far as to compare Trump's policy to the internment of Japanese people during the second World War. But the majority of conservative judges concluded that the president's campaign rhetoric was irrelevant and didn't negate his right to determine immigration policies. The president responded jubilantly, describing the ruling as “a tremendous victory for the American people and for our Constitution.” Trump, in one of his first acts as commander-in-chief, signed an executive order last year that banned travel from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen for national security reasons. The policy, which many opponents perceived as thinly veiled religious bias, set off a national backlash and widespread protests. After two lower courts decided that the policy was both unconstitutional and [unlikely to protect the country](https://www.cnn.com/2017/02/09/politics/travel-ban-9th-circuit-ruling-full-text/index.html) from terrorism, the administration drew up a version that excluded Iraq and Sudan, added Chad, Venezuela, and North Korea, and contained waivers for green card holders or students. It didn't single out any religion in the text. A federal judge in Hawaii halted the implementation of that modified policy nationwide in October, and the Supreme Court ruling is related to that ruling. In December, the Supreme Court allowed the current version of the ban, weakened from its controversial initial form, to take effect while the case worked its way through the legal system. For the full segment, [click here.](https://cheddar.com/videos/scotus-upholds-trumps-travel-ban-2)

Share:
More In Politics
UNHCR Plans Ahead for 4 Million Refugees as 1 Million Already Flee Ukraine
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has reported that an estimated one million people have fled from Ukraine since Russia invaded. Christopher Boian, senior communications officer at UNHCR, joined Cheddar News to report on the current refugee crisis and what the world might expect if conditions continue to worsen. "We have planning figures that forecast as many as four million people could be forced to flee Ukraine," he said. "But that very much depends on how the conflict underway in that country at the moment unfolds in the days and possibly weeks ahead."
Study Shows Corn-Based Ethanol Could Be Worse for Climate Than Gasoline Alone
Under the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), corn-based ethanol has been mixed into gasoline sold at pumps in the U.S. since 2005, when a policy was enacted aimed at reducing emissions. Corn-based ethanol had been thought to be a relatively greener energy source compared to other biofuels, but now, a new study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences reports it may be actually worse for the climate than straight gasoline. Tyler Lark, an assistant scientist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison's Center for Sustainability, joined Cheddar News' Closing Bell and discussed the pushback against the study. "Essentially when you need to produce more corn to meet the demand for use as ethanol as fuel, farmers respond and they switch more crops like soybeans and wheat into corn," Lark said. "They also bring more land into production, so things that used to be pasture grassland, and both those activities are associated with increased greenhouse gas emissions."
Bethenny Frankel's BStrong Providing Aid Efforts for Ukrainian Refugees
In the past few years, Betthany Frankel has made a major name for herself as a philanthropist after founding the BStrong initiative, which has provided relief to people impacted by natural disasters as well as the COVID-19 pandemic. Now, BStrong is shifting its focus to Ukraine, raising millions of dollars in donations for those impacted by Russia's invasion. Bethenny Frankel, the founder of BStrong, joins Cheddar News' Closing Bell to discuss.
Load More