Ninth Circuit’s Ruling on the Travel Ban Swiftly Rejected by Supreme Court

On September 7, 2017 a ruling was created so that certain qualifying relatives of immigrants from Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Yemen, and Libya would be admitted to the U.S. during the time that the travel ban was under legal review. This decision was reached by a three judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and would have marked a change to the original interpretation of the Supreme Court’s ruling in June. The Supreme Court countered this ruling by blocking the Ninth Circuit’s ruling indefinitely. The next opportunity for this to change will be on October 10^th, 2017 when the supreme court will hear arguments challenging the travel ban.

The discrepancies between the interpretations of the travel ban came down to what family members were considered close enough to qualify as “bona fide family relationships” and would thereby be eligible for admittance into the U.S. The original decision by the supreme court allowed immediate family members and in-laws but excluded grandparents, grandchildren, sisters-in-law, brothers-in-law, nieces and nephews, cousins, aunts and uncles. The Ninth Circuit ruled that “the Government does not offer a persuasive explanation for why a mother-in-law is clearly a bona fide relationship, in the Supreme Court’s prior reasoning, but a grandparent, grandchild, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, or cousin is not.” The court also stated that the Immigration and Nationality Act was implemented with the intent to preserve the family unit of immigrants and the limited scope of family members allowed was in contradiction of that intent.

Another ruling by the Ninth Circuit panel which was decisively shut down by the supreme court on September 12^th was their rejection of the Trump administration’s ban on refugees formally accepted by resettlement agencies. The heart of the Ninth Circuit’s rejection was that the resettlement process for refugees in the United States under the travel ban took almost 2 years of time to successfully complete which is an unrealistic requirement for refugees who have neither time nor homes. The court stated that refugees’ lives “remain in vulnerable limbo during the pendency of the Supreme Court’s stay. Refugees have only a narrow window of time to complete their travel, as certain security and medical checks expire and must then be re-initiated. Even short delays may prolong a refugee’s admittance.”

The supreme court’s blocking of the Ninth Circuits ruling leaves the Trump administration’s travel ban in effect. Refugees who have formal assurances from resettlement agencies are still banned and will be until the consolidated case on the travel ban occurs on October 12^th.