‘Anti-muslim’ US travel ban wins backing of Supreme Court

‘Justice Sonia Sotomayor said that history would not look kindly on the court’s misguided descision’

The US Supreme Court yesterday upheld Donald Trump’s travel ban covering people from several Muslim-majority countries.

The decision was passed 5-4, splitting the justices along political lines and handing a timely boost to the US president, who greeted the news by tweeting “Wow!”

The ban prevents most immigrants, refugees and visa holders from five Muslim-majority countries – Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen – as well as North Korea and Venezuela from entering the US.

Supporters of the policy argued it was needed for national security but critics insisted that Mr Trump’s antimuslim rhetoric showed the ban was effectively discriminating on religious grounds.

Chief Justice John Roberts, who wrote the majority opinion for the five conservative justices, argued the travel ban was ”neutral” and did not exceed the powers of the presidency.

Mr Roberts said the policy had “a legitimate grounding in national security concerns”, while insisting the court would express “no view on the soundness” of the travel ban.

But Justice Sonia Sotomayor said: “History will not look kindly on the court’s misguided decision today, nor should it.”

She said that based on the evidence in the case “a reasonable observer would conclude that the proclamation was motivated by anti-muslim animus”.

Mr Trump responded by saying the “tremendous victory” was “a moment of profound vindication following months of hysterical commentary from the media and Democratic politicians who refuse to do what it takes to secure our border and our country”.

However, leading Democrats were appalled by the decision. Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress, said: “It is not within the president’s authority to discriminate on religion ... the ruling is simply ignoring the truth of what the president is trying to do.” ♦seventeen US states have launched legal action against Donald Trump’s administration over its child migrant separation policy, claiming it is “cruel and unlawful”. New York, California, Washington, Iowa and Massachusetts were among those states whose Democratic attorney generals brought the case.